Process Systems Engineering –

Lessons learned from the pulp and paper industry

Pablo A. Rolandi, PhD

With thanks to Prof. José A. Romagnoli, my PhD supervisor at the PSE@USyd Group at the University of Sydney from 2001 to 2005.
 Goals
●
A simple goal…
… to facilitate a successful information sharing session

●
About…
… Process Systems Engineering:
●
techniques
●
methodologies
●
approaches
●
outcomes and insights
●
tools

●
Using...
… an industrial pulp-and-paper plant as a holistic case-study
2
Outline

Background:
●
Industrial process
●
Process model
Process Systems Engineering:
●
Dynamic process simulation
●
Dynamic parameter estimation and model validation
●
Steady-state process optimisation
●
Dynamic process optimisation
●
Multi-objective process optimisation
●
Dynamic data reconciliation
●
Other process systems engineering techniques
●
Summary and conclusions
3
Industrial process:
Pulp and paper manufacturing
Process system
An industrial pulp-and-paper mill

●
Tightly integrated and closed-cycle processes
●
Operability and controllability issues
– reduction of fixed capital costs
– elimination of redundant (back-up) equipment
– reduction of inventories (hold-ups)
– relatively short response times
●
Profitability and environmental pressures 5
 Process system
A continuous pulping area

The continuous pulping area of a pulp and

paper plant is a process system of
interconnected units:
i) a feed line (right), ii) a heat exchange and
recovery network (top, right), and iii) a single-
vessel hydraulically-full digester (top, middle;
also colour image on the top right).
6
Process system
A continuous pulping area
Continuous cooking digesters Continuous pulping systems
●
Equipment function ●
Novel manufacturing technologies:
feeding, recovery, cooking and washing
– deplete lignin from cellulosic wood
matrix – very flexible process
●
Equipment characteristics ●
Feed-line
– co-current/counter-current flow patterns – raw material transportation
– solid-liquid multi-phase flow ●
Continuous cooking digester
– compressible chip-column
– chemical reactions and washing by
●
Equipment operation diffusion
– key process variable measurements – complex physico-chemical
are unavailable phenomena
●
unmeasured yield (always) and – complex process operation
selectivity (usually) ●
Heat exchange and recovery network
– disturbances (wide-ranging time-
scales) – increased process integration
●
composition and moisture of Pulp and paper mills – process areas
wood chips (raw materials) ●
Fibre line
●
concentration of pulping
chemicals ●
Paper machine
– planned/unplanned transitions ●
Evaporators
●
rate- and grade-production ●
Lime kiln
changes ●
Power boiler 7
Process model
“All models are wrong; some are useful.”
George E.P. Box
Process models and the modelling process
●
From elementary models to composite models…
●
From unit-level models to system-level models…

9
 Process model
At a glance*
Continuous cooking digester Continuous pulping area
●
Distributed parameter system ●
Number of units
– DAE approximation of PDAE – 1 continuous cooking digester
– ~20 discretisation points – 6 heat exchange and recovery units
– 6 reaction zones – 8 material and energy sources
●
Chemical species – 21 tees and junctions and 8 flow
transportation units
– 5 wood-matrix species – 25 controllers and 51 sensors
– 7 free/entrained liquid species ●
System of equations
●
Phenomena
– 1.5 10^4 differential-algebraic equations
– reaction – 1.0 10^3 ordinary differential equations
– diffusion: intra- e inter-particle – 1.4 10^4 algebraic equations
– 3 phases: heterogeneous system – 2.5 10^2 degrees-of-freedom
●
Mass and energy balances – 2.1 10^2 discontinuities
– dynamic ●
Modelling tools
●
Physical properties – gPROMS** (v2.3) ~2005
– simple correlations
10
*Rolandi (2005); ** Process Systems Enterprise Ltd.
Dynamic process simulation
“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain;
and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
Albert Einstein
 Dynamic process simulation
Domain problems and engineering tasks
Design-driven process analysis* Data-driven process analysis*
●
Economic analysis ●
From plant “historian”
●
Control system design/analysis ●
Simulation of historical process
conditions (normal/abnormal)
●
Process flexibility analysis
●
Standard/emergency operating
procedure verification Engineering training
●
Start-up/shut-down operating ●
Operator training simulators (OTS)
procedure verification

*not an exhaustive list. 12

 Dynamic process simulation
Mathematical formulation
●
Given a mathematical model (M+N equations; index-1 DAE):

differential variables   process parameters

(and time derivatives) (2N)
algebraic variables (M) degrees-of-freedom
●
A dynamic simulation problem entails solving:

 
time horizon
input variable trajectories*
initial conditions** (N equations)

●
This is a so-called Initial Value Problem (IVP)
●
Numerical solution algorithms: “integrators”
– linear multi-step, single-step multi-stage, implicit/explicit, stiff/non-stiff, etc.
– Adams, Backward Differentiation Formulae (BDF), Runge-Kutta (RK), etc.
*time evolution of input process variables; **initial value of state process variables. 13
 Dynamic process simulation
Modelling operating procedures
●
Operating procedures with an extraordinary level of detail can be modelled* and solved
– e.g., start-ups, production/grade shifts, batch sequences, etc.
– >> multi-stage IVP with implicit and explicit discontinuities

*A “Task” snapshot in gPROMS v4.0 (Process Systems Enterprise Ltd). 14

 Dynamic process simulation
Simulation of historical process conditions
original trajectory sampling reconstruction approximate trajectories
not known fitness of reconstruction?

from continuous trajectories to “historian” plant data from discrete set of measurements
discrete set of measurements cannot be used directly to continuous trajectories
●
Smoothing is not sufficient
– reduces noise/variability but does not produce continuous (input) functions
●
Reconstruction of process trajectories (RPT)
– combined continuous / discrete modelling paradigm (i.e., multi-stage IVP)
– explicit parameterisation w.r.t. time (independent variable)
– partition of time domain in multiple stages
– characterisation of trajectories by basis functions
●
for example, Lagrange polynomials, spline polynomials, etc.
15
Simulation of historical process conditions
Study results and discussion

selectivity profiles [#K] vs height [#]; yield profiles [%] vs height [#];
absolute (lhs) and relative (rhs) values absolute (lhs) and relative (rhs) values

●
Simulation-based process troubleshooting
– where: impregnation zone (at the top of the digester)
– observation: kappa number increases, yield decreases
– conclusion: cellulose solubilisation at impregnation stages
– diagnosis: undesired side reactions taking place
– issue: pulping targets lignin degradation… not cellulose solubilisation!
●
Can we do better? What should the optimal operation be like?
16
Process simulation
In a nutshell
●
It is the “work horse” of chemical process engineering
– steady-state and/or dynamic
– addresses a wide range of domain problems and engineering tasks

●
It provides an effective mechanism for establishing process understanding
– computational experiments enable inspection of the full state of the process

●
Steady-state simulation
– requires attention to the correct specification of degrees-of-freedom

●
Dynamic simulation
– requires attention to the design of process scenarios for analysis that are
meaningful and useful

●
A wide range of tools are available
– equation-oriented and sequential-modular modelling technologies exist
– custom modelling is key for complex or non-conventional processes 17
Dynamic parameter estimation
and model validation
“Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one.”
Voltaire
 Parameter estimation
Introduction
●
What are the reasons for the ubiquitous plant/model mismatch?
– Process-model uncertainty
●
Structural uncertainty: model structure may not be known accurately, or it
may be impractical to implement detailed mechanistic models
– e.g., anisotropic/isotropic raw materials, identity of chemical species
●
Parametric uncertainty: model parameters may not be known accurately
– e.g., fouling resistance, kinetic constants
– Process-data errors
●
Random errors: noise and outliers
●
Systematic errors: biases
●
How do we tackle plant/model mismatch?

tune model parameters such that they minimise

the error ||.|| between the experimental ( ~
Z ) and predicted (z) values of a subset of process variables
subject to the constraints F(.) and H(.) imposed by the models of the process and the sensors,
respectively

19
 Dynamic parameter estimation
Mathematical formulation
●
Given a mathematical model:

 
●
A dynamic parameter estimation problem entails solving:
objective function
(e.g., maximum likelihood)
 
decision variables control variables
(i.e., input measurements)
initial conditions time horizon

sensor variance model

random errors
sensor model systematic errors
process parameters
(e.g., kinetic constant) sensor variance
model parameters
sensor bias parameters

simple bounds 20
 Parameter estimation from historical data
Study definition
●
Objective function ●
Time horizon
– maximum likelihood – 24 hr of operation

●
Decision variables ●
Initial conditions
– 1 process parameter – implicit state initialisation
procedure**
●
kinetic factor (pre-multiplier)
– 1 sensor parameter
●
Process variable trajectories
●
SPP* variance
– reconstruction of process
trajectories (30 min)
●
Measured output variables
– 1 sensor (SPP) ●
Goal:
– calibrate process model
●
Measured input variables
●
i.e., tune kinetics
– 21 controlled variables
– 5 disturbances

21
*SPP: smart pulp platform; IR-based in-line process instrumentation; ** Rolandi (2005).
Parameter estimation from historical data
Study results and discussion
 historian-based

kinetic pre-multiplier (KinPreMult) and SPP sensor variance (Omega):

optimal parameter estimates (EST), confidence intervals (CI), lower and
upper confidence bounds (LB and UB) at 95%, engineering units (EU)

SPP sensor variance [#K] vs kinetic pre-multiplier [adim]: optimal

parameter estimates (EST), joint confidence region (REG), individual
confidence intervals (INT) at 95%

Statistical analysis at 95% confidence

selectivity/kappa number [#K] vs
time [hr]; experimental selectivity
●
confidence intervals
values (SPP) vs model
predictions (CS1) and outlier
●
coefficients of variation
(OUT); top: overlay plot; bottom:
residuals plot; data from plant
– kinetic pre-multiplier: 0.83 %
historian – SPP sensor variance: 35.9 %
●
confidence ellipsoid
– parameters are not correlated
Non-parametric test
●
non-random residuals (90% confidence)
 Model validation from historical data
Study results and discussion

Model validation observations

●
good agreement
●
greater variability in measured process data
than in model predictions

selectivity/kappa number [#K] vs time [hr]:

overlay plots of experimental values (SPP)
and model predictions (VE1, VE2) at two Likely causes of mismatch*
different production levels; VE1 at 541
ton/day and VE2 at 473 ton/day); data from
plant historian
●
chip composition fluctuations
●
chip size distribution
●
reaction/diffusion phenomena
●
chip column movement and compaction
●
momentum transfer phenomena

* most probably in increasing order of importance. 23

Parameter estimation and model validation
In a nutshell
●
It provides a mechanism for rigorous calibration of mechanistic process
models
– steady-state and/or dynamic
– from laboratory, pilot-plant and industrial-plant data
– usually sensitive to outliers

●
The formulation of a PE problem requires special attention
– PE is an unconstrained (nonlinear) optimisation problem (i.e., a NLP)
– it usually involves a workflow with iterative refinements

●
There is a well-established theory for the assessment of the quality of fit
– including (but not limited to) significance tests and confidence
intervals/regions

●
Model validation must use a different data set than used in PE

24
Steady-state process optimisation
“The more unpredictable the world is the more we rely on predictions.”
Steve Rivkin
 Steady-state process optimisation
Domain problems and engineering tasks
Process synthesis/design* Via rigorous optimisation…
●
Economic optimisation ●
… instead of via heuristics and rules-
of-thumb
– throughput optimisation
– i.e., removing any unnecessary
– raw material and energy
a-priori simplifications
consumption optimisation
– set-point optimisation
●
Process synthesis Benefits:

●
Process equipment design
●
Effective exploration of high-
dimensional decision-variable space
●
Process flexibility design
●
Ability to deal with significant
●
Process robustness design complexities
●
Process integration design

*not an exhaustive list. 26

Steady-state process optimisation
Mathematical formulation
●
Given a (steady-state) mathematical model:
  (no time derivatives )
●
A steady-state optimisation problem entails solving:
  objective function
decision variables
control variables
(e.g., PID set-points)
process parameters
inequality constraints (e.g., equipment sizing)
equality constraints simple bounds
●
This is a so-called Nonlinear Programming (NLP) problem
●
Numerical solution algorithms: “optimisers”
– gradient-based, gradient-free
– constrained, reduced gradient, Lagrangian, augmented penalty, etc.
– Sequential Linear/Quadratic Programming (SLP/SQP), Interior Point (IP),
Conjugate Gradient (CG), Particle Swarm, etc. 27
Dynamic process optimisation
Study formulation
Engineering problem description Optimisation problem description
●
Maximise ●
Objective function
– production – pulp yield
●
Satisfy ●
Constraints
– target production rate and – achieving a given production target
selectivity (i.e., pulp quality) (600 ton/day)
●
downstream impact… – meeting standard quality
●
single process unit! specifications (selectivity; 90 #K)
– consumption of pulping – white liquor and wash filtrate (2x)
chemicals rates
●
Change ●
Decision variables
– nine set-points of the regulatory – set point of white liquor (3x) and
control layer (PID) wash filtrate (3x) addition controllers
●
feed rate of wood chips – set point of heater's temperature
●
alkali distribution policy controllers (2x)
●
wash addition policy – set point of screw meter controller
(1x)
●
column heating policy
28
Steady-state process optimisation
Study results and discussion
●
Optimal operating conditions
– maximum production
●
White liquor set-points
– reduction: from 16.50 % to 16.37 %
– same level of addition but significant redistribution:
●
less to the make-up line
●
more to the lower circulation line
●
Wash filtrate set-points
– from 2.500 L/ton to 2.636 L/ton
●
Temperature set-points
– increased lower circulation heater temperature by 3.25 K
– decreased wash circulation heater by 4.00 K

29
 Steady-state process optimisation
Study results and discussion
Temperature profiles
●
more even temperatures throughout the
whole reactor
– kinetic effects (and diffusion)
●
high-temperature zone
– gradient change from 17.4 K to 11.8 K

temperature profile [°C] vs height [#]; Key process variable profiles

absolute (ABS) values and delta (REL) w.r.t. base case
●
low-temperature zone
– higher yield and constant selectivity
●
high-temperature zone
– reduced yield and selectivity
●
at the exit
– constant yield, improved selectivity
●
>> less lignin, more cellulose!
selectivity (S) [#K] and yield (Y) [%] vs height [#];
30
delta w.r.t. base case
Steady-state process optimisation
Study results and discussion – outputs
●
Optimal operating conditions
– maximum production
●
Production performance
– pulp yield improvement of approximately 1.2 %
●
more wood-pulp production at same wood-chip consumption
●
Economic performance
– net profit increase by approximately 1.04 US$/min
●
+0.52 million US$/year
– higher pulp throughput
●
1.68 US$/min revenue increase
– higher flow of black liquor for evaporation
●
0.64 US$/min cost increase
●
Is this the best we can achieve?
31
Steady-state process optimisation – reloaded
Study results and discussion – outputs
●
Optimal operating conditions
– maximum net profit
●
i.e., let’s only change the nature of the objective function!
●
Production performance
– pulp yield reduction of approximately 0.15 %
●
Economic performance
– net profit increase by approximately 3.00 US$/min (incremental)
●
+2.03 million US$/year (compared with the original operating policy)
– lower pulp throughput
●
0.17 US$/min revenue decrease
– lower flow of black liquor for evaporation
●
3.18 US$/min expense decrease
●
How can this be achieved?
32
Steady-state process optimisation – reloaded
Study results and discussion – decision variables
●
Optimal operating conditions
– maximum net profit
●
White liquor set-points
– from 16.36 % to 15.26 %
●
6.75 % relative change!
●
Wash filtrate set-points
– from 2.636 L/ton to 2.250 L/ton
●
14.6 % relative change!
●
Temperature set-points
– increased lower circulation heater temperature by 7.28 K (!)
– wash circulation heater unchanged
– as a matter of fact, stuck on lower bound! >> elasticity (i.e., shadow prices)
●
Quantitative results for process improvement
33
 Steady-state process optimisation
In a nutshell
●
It is an efficient and effective way of exploring a high-dimensional decision-
variable space*
– investigates feasibility (set of realisable solutions) and optimality (best possible
solution)
– addresses a wide range of domain problems and engineering tasks

●
It provides an effective mechanism for establishing process understanding
– usually leading to locally optimal solutions (global optimality is computationally
intensive**)

●
The formulation of a steady-state optimisation problem requires special attention
– its structure and numerical values
●
objective function, decision variables, constraints and bounds
– optimisation studies can produce analyses that are not meaningful or useful
●
avoid “GIGO” >> garbage in, garbage out

●
The solution of a constrained NLP is reasonably straightforward
– still, equation-oriented modelling technologies have a clear advantage
34
*i.e., a large proportion of “decision spaces” of practical interest; **but can be justified for some applications.
 Dynamic process optimisation
“With the availability of much more powerful computers,
should not the basic approaches (…) be reconsidered?”*
Richalet, Rault, Testud & Papon

*originally said in the context of advanced process control, but equally applicable to any computationally-intensive engineering task.
 Dynamic process optimisation
Domain problems and engineering tasks
Process synthesis/design* Via rigorous optimisation…
All of these… and more:● … instead of via heuristics and rules-
●
Economic optimisation
● of-thumb
Control system design/analysis
– throughput optimisation
● – i.e., removing any unnecessary
Standard/emergency operating
– raw material and energy
procedure design a-priori simplifications
consumption optimisation
–
●
Start-up/shut-down operating
set-point optimisation
procedure design
●
Process synthesis Benefits:
Transition planning ●
●

●
Process equipment design Effective exploration of high-
dimensional decision-variable space
●
Process flexibility design
Benefits: ●
Ability to deal with significant
●
Process robustness ● design complexities
Ability to deal with transient conditions
● and complex dynamics
Process integration design

*not an exhaustive list. 36

 Dynamic process optimisation
Mathematical formulation
●
A dynamic optimisation problem entails solving:
  objective function
decision variables

initial conditions
time horizon
time-varying controls
(e.g., PID set-points)
time-invariant controls
(e.g., nominal PID set-points) end-point inequality constraints
end-point equality constraints
simple bounds interior-point
inequality constraints
path inequality constraints
●
This is a so-called Dynamic Optimisation Problem (DOP)
●
Numerical solution algorithms
– simultaneous solution: full discretisation (of differential-algebraic equations)
– sequential solution (Control-Vector Parameterisation -CVP): discretisation of
decision variables (and constraints) only 37
 Dynamic process optimisation
Transient operation and study formulation
Transient process operation Dynamic optimisation study
●
Minimise ●
Objective function
– selectivity deviation – selectivity deviation (from 90 #K)
●
Satisfy ●
Constraints
– target production rate increase – achieving a given production target
increase (+50 ton/day)
●
Change
●
Decision variables
– two set-points of the regulatory
layer (PID) – set point of screw meter controller (1x)
●
feed rate of wood chips – set point of heater temperature
– 2.0 rpm / 50 ton/day controllers (2x)
●
lower circulation heater – >> note difference of control structure
– 0.50 K / 50 ton/day (we’ll revisit this)
●
wash circulation heater ●
Horizon
– no-change! – 12 hr of transient operation
– all other set-points follow fixed-
ratio changes ●
Control intervals* (discretisation)
– 1x 1 hr + 6x 1 hr + 1x 2 hr + 1x 3 hr
*in accordance with standard operating procedures and operators’ practices. 38
Dynamic process optimisation
Study results and discussion – decision variables
top: chip-meter [rpm]; middle: lower circulation heater
[ºC]; bottom: wash circulation heater [ºC] vs time [hr]
Transition planning profiles
●
Chip-meter
– smother speed-up
– feed load starts 2 hr earlier!

●
Lower circulation heater
– gradual temperature increase
– temperature boost starts
immediately!

●
Wash circulation heater
– sharp temperature increase during
chip-meter speed-up
– settles to small temperature increase

39
 Dynamic process optimisation
Study results and discussion – outputs/revisited
Transition planning study
●
Let’s consider the following set-up
instead…

selectivity [#K] vs time [hr]; standard (SUB) and

●
Decision variables
optimised (OPT) production rate transition procedure
– set point of screw meter controller (1x)
●
Goal
– set point of lower-circulation heater
– minimise selectivity deviation temperature controller only (1x)
●
Outcome – >> same active control structure as in
– very tight control of key quality base case
variable is possible!
●
by actively using 3 set-points!
●
Analysis ●
How different will the outcome be?
– coarse and fine control
●
lower and wash heaters,
respectively 40
Dynamic process optimisation – revisited
Study results and discussion
top: chip-meter [rpm]; middle: lower circulation heater
[ºC]; bottom: selectivity [#K] vs time [hr]
Transition planning profiles
●
Chip-meter
– no significant changes

●
Lower circulation heater
– higher temperatures sooner
– compensating for wash circulation
heater

●
Selectivity deviation
– no significant changes
●
constant kappa number

●
Outcome
– equivalent selectivity results
– >> alternative operating procedure!
41
Dynamic process optimisation
In a nutshell
●
It can produce significant insights into the transient behaviour and optimal
transient operating procedures of complex processes

●
An effective formulation requires attention to detail (and benefits from previous
experience)
– its structure and numerical values
●
time horizon; control-interval and control-vector parameterisations
●
initial- and end-point constraints; interior-point and path constraint s
– the chances of formulating a problem that fails to solve are high
●
but such infeasible formulations are usually too restrictive, unrealistic or simply
incorrect
– alternatively, the problem formulation may not be sufficiently constrained
●
or the constraints are “surrogate” measures of performance with poorer
predictive capabilities

●
The solution of a constrained DOP requires advanced numerical solution
algorithms
– equation-oriented modelling technologies have a clear advantage
●
in terms of scope and solution speed
42
Multi-objective process optimisation
“Complex goals are generally best achieved obliquely.”
John Kay
 Multi-objective process optimisation
Introduction
●
We found that in the pulp-and-paper mill…
– maximum productivity and maximum profitability are incompatible performance
objectives
– maximum profit leads to less efficient use of raw materials
– optimal steady-state conditions or dynamic transitions may be considered be too
aggressive to be implemented in the plant...
●
Perhaps more importantly…
– not all process constraints of importance for the operation of a continuous
cooking digester were added to the optimisation problem formulation >>
incomplete study*
●
Multi-objective process optimisation is an holistic framework for computing and
contrasting a family of solutions of a single process design/optimisation problem
in a rigorous fashion
– it is based on the concept of a Pareto set

a Pareto optimal solution is a set of non-inferior solutions in the objective

space defining a boundary beyond which none of the objectives can be improved
without sacrificing at least one of the other objectives

*e.g., the minimum concentration of chemicals in the wood chip matrix (e.g., to avoid condensation reactions). 44
 Multi-objective process optimisation
Results and discussion
Multi-objective trade-offs
●
Point “CS1”
– high yield, low profit
●
Point “CS3”
Pareto optimal set (three points);
net profit [US$/min] vs pulp yield [%]
– high profit, low yield
●
Point “CS2”
– high profit (1.4% loss)
– intermediate yield (50% loss)
– “safe” operation*

left (clockwise): chip meter speed, white liquor addition make-

●
Which one is the best?
up, recirculation flows 2x (lower and wash circulation lines),
wash filtrate addition 3x (lower and wash circulation lines and – which constraints are active?
digester bottoms), heater temperatures 2x (lower and wash
circulation heaters);
– could any constraints be violated
right (clockwise): pulp yield, net profit, while liquor addition due to small disturbances?
charge, wash filtrate addition charge, minimum residual alkali,
washing efficiency and weak black liquor flow.
●
>> robust optimisation
45
*it includes minimum reactant concentration (residual alkali) constraints.
Multi-objective process optimisation
In a nutshell
●
There are at least two distinct criteria (and usually more) in any engineering
design/operation problem
– economic and technological
– safety, environmental, etc...

●
Multi-objective optimisation is a framework for rigorous quantification of the
associated trade-offs
– this results in a Pareto set of equivalent solutions

46
Dynamic data reconciliation
“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
Albert Einstein
 Dynamic data reconciliation
Introduction
●
How do we tackle plant / model mismatch?

tune model parameters such that they minimise

the error ||.|| between the experimental ( ~
Z ) and predicted (z) values of a subset of process variables
subject to the constraints F(.) and H(.) imposed by the models of the process and the sensors,
respectively

●
Parameter estimation (PE)  
u z
– inaccurate model u F(z,y,u,d,θ)
– process parameters (θ)
d y
   
●
Data reconciliation (DR)
u z
– inaccurate data F(z,y,u,d)
– random (ε) and systematic (β) d y
– measurement errors    
u z
●
Joint parameter estimation / F(z,y,u,d,θ)
data reconciliation (JPEDR*)
d y 48
*the formulation of this problem fits the description on page 20.
 Dynamic data reconciliation
Study formulation
●
Objective function ●
Time horizon
– weighted least squares – 24 hr of operation
●
Decision variables
– 2 process parameters ●
Initial conditions
●
kinetic factor – implicit state initialisation
●
wood chip moisture procedure*
– 3 sensor biases
●
white liquor addition flow ●
Process variable trajectories
●
wash filtrate addition flow
– reconstruction of process
●
upper extraction flow trajectories (30 min)
●
Measured output variables
– 8 sensors (7 flow ●
Goal
measurements)
●
Measured input variables – investigate the closure of the
general mass balance in the
– 21 manipulations continuous cooking digester
– 5 disturbances
* Rolandi (2005). 49
 Dynamic data reconciliation
Study results and discussion – biases
●
Kinetic pre-multiplier vs chip
impregnation factor
confidence ellipsoid;
kinetic pre-multiplier – correlated: cannot fully distinguish
[adim] vs chip between higher velocities of reaction
impregnation factor and higher chip moisture values
[m3/kg]
●
Upper extraction screen flow bias
– 6.4 % bias
– 46.71 % precision (at 95%)
– identifiable with given experimental
set-up!
coefficient of variation (CV) and bias (ERR) for the ●
from plant historian
three reconciled volumetric flow measurement – but not identifiable if 1 sensor is
sensors; white liquor charge, wash filtrate to digester eliminated!
bottoms; upper extraction screen

●
Upper extraction screen flow bias vs
confidence ellipsoid;
chip impregnation factor
upper extraction screen – correlated: higher moisture values
flowrate [m3/min] vs can be explained by lower sensor
chip impregnation biases
factor [m3/kg]
●
this relationship can be explained
mechanistically
50
Dynamic data reconciliation
Study results and discussion – inventory/balance
Mass balance closure
●
Raw volumetric flowrate data
– purely data-driven
– 11.3 % error (to be expected)

●
Raw mass flowrates
relative error in mass-balance closure; raw volumetric
– model-based simulation
flowrates (red), raw mass flowrates (blue) and
reconciled mass flowrates (green) vs time [hr]
– 3.5 % error (better)

●
Inventory analysis ●
Mass balance reconciliation
– 32% of 3.1 m3/min – found 3 biases: 6.4, 7.1, 8.2 %
– >> 32,000 m3/yr ●
Reconciled mass flowrates
●
Cost analysis – model-based optimisation
– 56% of 88 US$/min – 0.7 % error (best!)
– >> 0.50 million US$/yr 51
Data reconciliation
In a nutshell
●
Models are not the only source of errors and uncertainty; lab, pilot-plant and
industrial-plant data also are
– data reconciliation provides a more balanced perspective on the issue of
plant / model mismatch

●
Accurate inventory analysis requires model-based tools
– unfortunately, industrial process instrumentation is usually insufficient to
enable the application of hybrid techniques using process data and process
models

●
Advanced model-based technologies promote the formulation imaginative
process engineering techniques and methodologies and solution of
important process engineering problems
– steady-state and dynamic data reconciliation is one such technique
– process controllability, process flexibility, process robustness and optimal
sensor placement are others

52
Other process systems engineering techniques
“For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert.”
Arthur C. Clarke
 Other process systems engineering techniques
●
Stochastic simulation and optimisation
– uncertainty analysis >> impact of variability (the “known unknowns”);
propagation of uncertainty

●
Local and global sensitivity analysis
– LSA >> moderately useful
– GSA >> apportion “output” uncertainty to “input” uncertainty/variability
●
e.g., enables rigorous (and effective) meta-modelling and surrogate
(approximate) models

●
Mathematical programming
– Linear Programming (LP) (i.e., linearity “assumption”)
– Mixed Integer Linear/Nonlinear Programming (MILP/MINLP*)
●
enables rigorous synthesis and design

●
Real-time on-line applications
– Soft-sensing / State-estimation
– Model Predictive Control (MPC) & Real-time Dynamic Optimisation (RTDO)
54
* it exhibits many local optima (non-convexities & multiple -sometimes degenerate- all-integer solutions).
Summary and conclusions
“Give me where to stand, and I will move the Earth.”
Archimedes
 Summary and conclusions
●
Large-scale, plant-wide, process models are a fundamental component of
sophisticated, state-of-the-art process-systems engineering techniques,
methodologies and workflows

●
Equation-oriented process modelling tools (e.g., gPROMS*) enable the
efficient development and maintenance of these models throughout the
life-cycle
– via custom modelling (from scratch) of from pre-existing model libraries
(in-house or third-party)

●
The problem you define is the problem you solve!
– avoid GIGO >> revisit the engineering problem and refine the problem
formulation several times (iterative process), usually involving colleagues
and clients

●
Model-based techniques enable engineers to manage complexity more
effectively and efficiently, to deliver technological breakthroughs faster and
to realise massive economic improvements.
56
* Process Systems Enterprise Ltd.
Background slides
 Model-centric Framework for
Integrated Operations Support*
SURROUNDINGS (WORLD / MARKET)

DECISION-MAKERS (OPERATORS / PROCESS ENGINEERS)

PROCESS DATA PROCESS DATA
PROCESS PROCESS
SIMULATION SIMULATION
Past Scenarios Future Scenarios

ACTIONS / DECISIONS
RECONCILIED DATA
DATA / KNOWLEDGE

DATA PROCESS
RECONCILIATION OPTIMISATION
BIAS ESTIMATES MECHANISTIC
PROCESS OPTIMAL NOMINAL
PARAMETER ESTIMATES MODEL OPERATING POINT
PARAMETER TRANSITION
ESTIMATION MANAGEMENT
CONSISTENT DATA OPTIMAL NOMINAL
& STATISTICS TRANSITION

CONDITIONING & ADVANCED

PREPROCESSING CONTROL
RAW DATA CONTROL ACTIONS

CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS / PLC / PKS)

PROCESS SYSTEM (PILOT-PLANT / INDUSTRIAL PLANT)

58
* Rolandi (2005); Rolandi & Romagnoli (2009).
Questions? Comments?
p.a.rolandi@gmail.com