newsletter 2003
TRANSCRIPT
NewsCENTRE FOR PROCESS ANALYTICS AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
Issue No. 5Spring 2003
INSIDE INSIDE INSIDE INSIDE INSIDE
Page 2Page 2 Page 3 Page 3 Back Page Back Page Back Page
Join theClub
ADVANCES IN PROCESS ANALYTICSAND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
Cutting Edge Science in Historical YorkAPACT 03 is an open forum for the presentation and discussion
of recent advances in engineering and scientific topics relevant toprocess analytics and control technologies.
The Conference will be held over three days, 28-30 April 2003at Le Meridien Conference Centre in York. The meeting will featureparallel sessions on Process Analysis and Process Control, inaddition to plenary sessions on integrated topics crucial to theachievement of manufacturing excellence. There will be a postersexhibition and vendor companies will be invited to exhibit equipmentand software.
Invited lectures will be presented by the following:Dr Jeff Gunnell, ExxonMobil Chemical Company, Fife
“Process Analytics 10 years from now”Prof John Perkins, Principal of Faculty of Engineering, ImperialCollege, London
“Responsive Processing - Opportunities and Challenges”Prof S. Joe Qin, Associate Professor and Quantum Fellowship,Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Texas, Austin
“Process Chemometric Techniques and Applications”Prof Paul Sharratt, University of Manchester Institute of Scienceand Technology
“Are you Designing your Plant the BRITEST Way?Prof Roma Tauler, Professor of Analytical Chemistry, University ofBarcelona
“Mul t ivar iate Curve Resolut ion of Mul t id imensionalSpectroscopic Data”
Dr Allen Wright, Avantium Technologies UK Ltd, Hexham“High Throughput Technologies - A Chemical EngineeringProspective”
York is a truly unique venue steeped in over 900 years ofhistory and Medieval character with a wealth of attractions andits own special ambience. It is the only city completely surroundedby original Medieval walls and is home to the famous York Minster,the largest Gothic Cathedral inWestern Europe.
The conference dinner willtake place in the impressivesetting of the National RailwayMuseum which houses theworld’s pre-eminent railwaycollection. Delegates will enjoya unique dining experience onthe station platform amongstcarriages and locomotives, setagainst the backdrop of theEdwardian era.
For further information andregistration details, contactCaro l Badger or Nata l ieDriscoll:Email: [email protected]: +44 141 548 4836
The venue for this year’s event is Le Meridien York (formerlyThe Royal York Hotel), a traditional 4 star hotel in York city centre,set within three acres of Victorian gardens, and boasting exten-sive newly refurbished leisure facilities. The event will takeplace in the purpose built conference centre.
TWO HEADS AREBETTER THAN ONE!!
In Phase II, it was decided to focus the managementstructure of CPACT to maximise R&D funding and anadvertisement was posted for a Technology Consultantto lead this endeavour. As a double solution, twoexcellent candidates have been appointed on part-timesix-month contracts, with the possibility of extension.The appointees will have separate roles but will worktogether on the preparation of a Development Plan andthe establishment of membership negotiations. Thehope is that by concentrating efforts at this stage,effective results will be achieved more quickly.
One of the appointees, John Green, is well known toCPACT, having just recently stepped down as CPACTIndustrial Management Board Representative for BPChemicals. John brings a wealth of knowledge andexpertise to his role as Technology Consultant in on-line process analysis and control.
Alan Mason has also accepted the CPACT Challenge!Alan runs a consultancy company, AJM ConsultingServices Ltd., and as part of his Technology Consultantrole has been asked to conduct a survey of companiesto identify issues that influence possible membershipof CPACT. His recommendations for the collaborationare eagerly awaited.
Phase II is concentrating on the integration of on-linemeasurement, process optimisation, performancemonitoring and control, for continuous, batch andinterconnected processes in the chemicals,biochemicals, pharmaceuticals, materials and foodmanufacturing sectors.
CPACT is also widening its activities and has joinedforces with the Specialised Organic Chemicals SectorAssociation (SOCSA) to form an EPSRC supportednetwork, SONAR. The aim is to encourage the take-up of process analytics and control technologies in theprocess sector. CPACT is also an active member ofother consortia.
Over the past 12 months theUniversity of Newcastle hasbeen carry ing out a majorrestructuring initiative with theaim of placing the University atthe leading edge in its research,teaching and commercialisationact iv i t ies. The number ofFaculties has been reducedfrom seven to three, and largerSchools have been established.A new Faculty of Science,Agriculture and Engineering
(SAgE) has been formed and a new School of ChemicalEngineering and Advanced Materials (CEAM) has beenestablished. The School brings together Chemical and ProcessEngineering with the newly integrated Advanced Materials team,and staff from the Department of Chemistry, alongside theUniversity £7.2M DTI Nanotechnology Institute. Julian Morris,co-director of CPACT (Newcastle), has been appointed to theheadship of the new School and is also a member of theUniversity Strategic Board.
As part of the re-structuring, the Department of EngineeringMathematics has been dissolved and split across three Schools,the School of Mathematics and Statistics, the School ofMechanical and Systems Engineering and the School ofChemical Engineering and Advanced Materials. Elaine Martin,co-director of CPACT(Newcastle), has moved into theSchool of Chemical Engineeringand Advanced Materials whereshe is Director of Research forthe new School.
Special congratulations are alsodue to Elaine who has beenawarded a PersonalProfessorship in Industr ialStatistics with effect from 1January 2003.
Restructuring atNewcastle
Julian Morris
Elaine MartinAlan Mason and John Green
Multi-site PerformanceMonitoring in BatchPharmaceuticalProduction
Determination of EthyleneOxide content of PolyetherPolyols by Low-Field 1HNMR Spectrometry
Ex-CPACTResearchers
EPSRC &Industry
Page 3
SteeringCommittee
ThermoOnix Umetrics
NATIONAL RAILWAY MUSEUM VIEW OF YORK MINSTER
project updates • project updates • project updates • project updates
2
Polyurethanes are produced by the reaction ofpolyisocyanates with polyether or polyester polyols. They areone of the most versatile groups of synthetic polymers, havinguses as diverse as rigid foams for insulation and elastomers forshoe soles [1 ]. Flexible polyurethane foams for furniture andautomotive seating typically utilise tri-functional polyether polyolsformed by the base catalysed reaction of propylene oxide (PO)and ethylene oxide (EO) with glycerol [2 ]. The PO:EO ratio andthe overall molecular weight are major parameters which affectthe physical properties of the final product.
A number of methods, including NMR spectrometry, have beenused to elucidate the structures of polyether polyols. Recentdevelopments in the design of permanent magnets have allowedchemical shift information to be obtained with small, robust low-field NMR instruments that are more suited to at-line or on-lineprocess analysis than conventional high-field spectometers [3 ,4 ].As line widths are broader, overlapping signals often occur in 1HNMR spectra produced by a low-field, medium-resolutioninstrument. Traditional approaches to the analysis of overlappingsignals include the construction of multivariate calibration modelsusing, e.g., PLS. Such calibration methods require continuousmaintenance and updating. Recently, a method based on thedirect exponential curve resolution algorithm (DECRA) [5 ] hasbeen developed, which allows quantification of the NMR signal inthe time domain, i.e. the free induction decay (FID) signal [6 ].
In this study, several samples of a glycerol-based polyetherpolyol have been analysed using a low-field, medium-resolutionNMR spectrometer manufactured by Resonance Instruments(Witney, UK). The instrument employs a permanent magnet andhas an operating frequency of 29.1 MHz for 1H. Data have beenanalysed using spectral integration and FID-DECRA to assessthe potential benefits of low-field NMR spectrometry fordetermination of %EO in a quality control application.
A low-field 1H NMR FT spectrum of one of the polyol samples,which has an EO content of 15.1 % w/w, is shown in Figure 1.The signal at 1.1 ppm can be attributed to the CH
3 protons in the
PO units of the polyether polyol, and the signal at 3.5 ppm can beattributed to the CH
2 protons in PO and EO and the CH protons in
PO. The glycerol (initiator) protons also contribute to the signal at3.5 ppm. The OH protons, which terminate the polyether polyol,give rise to a small signal at 2.1 ppm in high-field 1H NMR spectraand hence, contribute to the signal at 1.1 ppm in low-field spectra.
A univariate calibration model was prepared using EOconcentrations obtained from high-field 13C NMRspectrometry and the low-field 1H NMR measurements. Sixsamples (14.8, 15.1, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3 and 15.5 % w/w EO) wereused to construct calibration plots for FID-DECRA or spectralanalysis. The EO content for the remaining thirteen sampleswas then predicted and a comparison of the results is shown inTable 1. The average % errors (defined as the differencebetween the EO concentration calculated using low-field 1Hand high-field 13C NMR spectrometries, expressed as apercentage of the EO concentration calculated using high-field13C NMR spectrometry) obtained for FID-DECRA and spectralanalysis were 0.5 and 1.1 %, respectively. Lower average RSDvalues were obtained for FID-DECRA analysis (0.6 %) incomparison to spectral analysis (1.3 %). Statistical analysis ofthe FID-DECRA analysis data using a t-test (assuming equalvariances) suggests that differences in % EO content of polyolswithin 0.3 % w/w can be identified at the 95 % confidencelevel. In contrast, the direct procedure applied to the FT spectrawould allow differentiation of polyols to 0.5 % w/w.
Authors:Alison Nordon,1 Céline Meunier, 1 Robert H. Carr, 2 Paul J.Gemperline3 and David Littlejohn,11 Department of Pure and Applied Chemistry/CPACT, Universityof Strathclyde, 295 Cathedral Street, Glasgow, G1 1XL, UK.2 Huntsman Polyurethanes, Everslaan 45, B-3078 Everberg,Belgium.3 Department of Chemistry/MCEC, East Carolina University,Greenville, NC, USA.
IntroductionTraditionally where a product is manufactured at two or more
sites, separate process performance monitoring representationshave been developed. However it would be advantageous if asingle model could be developed on data from one site and whenthe process is transferred to a new site, the model is transferredalongside to enable the process to be up and running more quickly.However to date it has been conjectured that process operationand scale differences make such a scenario not viable. Thisarticle demonstrates, using statistical techniques, how a singlemultivariate statistical process control (MSPC) model can bedeveloped that encapsulates operation at two different sites andfor two different scales of operation.
The process studied is a single stage within a multi-stagesynthetic route for the production of an active pharmaceuticalingredient (API). The chemistry step involves an exothermicaddition that is controlled by reactant addition rate and reactortemperature and has a duration of approximately 4 hours. Althoughdifferent plant configurations have been employed at the twosites, a number of similar process variables are monitored,alongside quality control measures. The process variables includereactant addition rate, reactor temperature, reactor pressure,agitation rate and vapour temperature. The quality variablesinclude input and output material activity, process yield and variousimpurity levels. Data from 57 batches from Site A and 152 batchesfrom Site B were used in the analysis.
The methodology adopted for the development of a processperformance monitoring model was that of multi-way principalcomponent analysis. For its application, batch operation is requiredto be of equal duration. Two methods were used to standardisebatch length, cutting to a minimum batch duration and multivariateDynamic Time Warping (DTW) (Gollmer and Posten 1996; Kassidaset al. 1998). Multivariate DTW is a method that matches featuresin a data pattern, or profile, to a reference or optimal profile. Anoptimal batch profile is first identified and the other batches arealigned against this reference batch. Fig. 1 illustrates the resultingsynchronisation for the variables, reactor temperature andpressure for all batches at site A. Of particular note is theextraction of the underlying structure in the pressure variablethat was masked prior to the application of DTW. This pattern ofbehaviour is a consequence of how the process is currentlyoperated.
MULTI-SITE PERFORMANCE MONITORING IN BATCH PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTION
0 50 100 150 200 25025
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
Temperature,
?C
Time, Minute0 50 100 150 200
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
Temperature,
?C
Time, Minute
0 50 100 150 2000
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0 . 1
0.12
0.14
0.16
Pressure, BarG
Time, Minute
0 50 100 150 200 2500
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
Pressure, BarG
Time, Minute
Fig. 1.Synchronisation ofthe time trajectoriesby DTW for reactortemperature andpressure for allbatches.
analysis. These were first standardised across all batches. Abivariate scores plot of the first two principal components (Fig.2) shows the observations are clustered into two groups whichreflect each site, i.e. principal component 1 differentiates betweensites.
DETERMINATION OF ETHYLENE OXIDE CONTENT OF POLYETHER POLYOLS BY LOW-FIELD 1H NMR SPECTROMETRY
Interrogating the scores plot through the differentialcontribution plot, Fig. 3., shows that the differences were relatedto the reaction scale and thus it was conjectured that byremoving the scale effect, a single model could realistically bedeveloped for the two sites.Multi-group Multi-way PCA
An extension to multi-way principal component analysis(PCA), multi-group multi-way PCA, was investigated for thesimultaneous monitoring of the two manufacturing sites. Thescores plots, Fig. 4, clearly detects those batches that moveoutside the statistical control region (99 % confidence level)for the two sites. In addition it is of interest to interrogate thedifference in operation between those batches that have a largepositive score for principal component two and those with alarge negative score. Interrogating the differential contributionplot, Fig. 5, the pressure variable is identified. Furthermorethe batches identified out with the limits, although acceptable,were associated with operation that was not consistent withthe operation of the other batches.
This application has demonstrated the potential for asingle model being developed for process operation attwo sites and the fact that it may be possible to use such anapproach for product transfer.Conclusions
The capabilities of multi-group models based on thepooled sample variance-covariance matrix have beendemonstrated by application to the manufacture of a drugintermediate batch process. The methods of analysis describedin this work have been shown to be appropriate for multi-sitebatch process performance monitoring. A schematic of themethodology used is shown in Fig. 6. Batch length equalisationwas achieved through the application of multivariate DynamicTime Warping to the process data. The DTW batch data wasfurther reduced to a minimum length to ensure that it spannedthe main area of interest. Multi-way principal component analysiswas then applied to the pre-processed data. The first approachused analysed the data from each plant individually. Two combinedmodels that scaled the data differently were also studied.The multi-group models developed not only eliminates betweencluster/site variation but also allows the process monitoring oftwo different plants operating at different scales by a singlemodel. Principal Individual Scaling Algorithm l Component Analysis (PCA) using Principal Individual Scaling Algorithm l Component Analysis (PCA) using hthththhh
Process or Quality Data
Site B
Data Pre-processing
Individual Model
Individual Scaling
Algorithm
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using Variance-covariance Matrix (X
TX)
Site A
Combined Model
Multi-group Model
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using Pooled Variance-covariance Matrix (S)
Combined Scaling Algorithm
Individual Scaling Algorithm
Fig. 6. Schematic of various analysis approaches
This development provides a powerful monitoring tool forminimising the differences in product quality and isolatingdifferences in process operation across different manufacturingplants thus ensuring the manufacture of consistently high qualityproduct at minimal cost on a global scale. In addition it provides atool that can be used in conjunction with process knowledge intransferring a product between sites.
Combined PCA Model with Removal of Global MeanA combined principal component analysis (PCA) model was
first constructed by applying multi-way PCA to the standardiseddata matrix based on the batch process data from the two sites.The three identical process variables were selected for
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -15 -10
-5 0 5
10 15 20 25 30
t1
t2 1 2
3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14
15
16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33
34 35
36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
50 51
52
53 54 55 56 57 1
2 3 4 5
6 7 8
9
10 11 12
13 14 15
16 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28
29 30
31 32 33
34
35
36 37 38 39 40 41
42
43
44
45 46
47
48 49 50 51
52 53
54 55 56 57 58 59
60 61 62 63 64
65 66 67
68 69 70 71 72
73 74 75 76 77
78 79 80 81 82 83 84
85 86 87 88 89
90 91 92 93
94 95 96
97 98 99 100
101 102 103 104 105 106 107
108 109 110 111
112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120
121
122
123 124 126 127 128
129 130
131 132
133 134 135 136 137 138
139 140 141 142
143 144 145
146 147
148 149 150 151
152
0 5 0 1 0 0 150 200 250 3 0 0-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1Contributions between New Cluster and New Cluster 2 on PC 1
Fig. 3.Differentialcontribution plot
Fig. 2.Bivariate scores plotof principalcomponents 1 and 2.Site A, ‘*’, Site B, ‘x ’
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
t1
t2
Bivariate Scores Plot of PC1 vs PC2 - Combined X Blocks of Cork and Irvine
12
34
5
6
789
10
11
12 1314
15
16
17
1819
2021
2223 24252627 28
2930
3132
333435
363738
3940
41
424344
4546474849
50
51
52
53
54
555657
1234
5678
9
10
11
12
1314
15
16
17
18192021
22
2324
25
26
27
28
29
30
3132
33
34
35
36
3738
39
4041
42 43
44
4546
47
48
49
5051
525354
55
56
575859606162
63
64
65
6667
68
69
70717273
74
757677
787980
81
82
83
8485
86
878889
9091
92
93
9495
96
97
98
99100
101102103
104105
106
107108
109110111112113
114
115
116117118119
120121122123
124
125
126127
128
129130
131
132
133
134135
136137138
139
140141
142
143
144
145146
147
148149150
151
152Fig. 4.Bivariate scores plot ofprincipal components 1 and 2.Site A, ‘*’, Site B, ‘x ’
0 50 100 1 5 0 200 250 300- 0 . 2
- 0 . 1
0
0 . 1
0 . 2
0 . 3
0 . 4
0 . 5Contributions between New Cluster and New Cluster 2 on PC 2
Fig. 5.Differentialcontribution plot
Authors:C.W.L. Wong, A.J. Morris and E.B. MartinCentre for Process Analytics and Control TechnologyUniversity of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne.R.E.A. EscottGlaxoSmithKline Chemical Development, Tonbridge
-202468
?H/ppm
An additional advantage of FID-DECRA over spectral analysisis that it can be applied directly to the FID and does not requireapplication of phase correction or other pre-processing steps.Hence, analysis of the data using FID-DECRA would be mucheasier to automate than spectral analysis procedures. In somecases, it may be possible to apply a magnitude transform tothe data to achieve spectral information while avoidingapplication of a phase correction. However, spectral overlap ismore likely with the magnitude transform and hence, multivariatecalibration models would be required in such situations. Anotheradvantage of FID-DECRA over spectral analysis is that retentionof only those factors that describe the most significant variancein the data can reduce the effects of noise on the precision of theanalysis. The time required for acquisition of 1H NMR data foreach polyether polyol sample is approximately 5 minutes (forthree repeat measurements). The study has shown that the useof low-field, medium-resolution 1H NMR spectrometry, incombination with FID-DECRA offers potential advantages for at-line QC analysis of samples such as polyether polyols.
The full version of this report appears in Analytica ClimicaActa, 2002, 472, 133-140.
Figure 1 - Low-field 1H NMR spectrum of a polyether polyolwith an EO content of 15.1 % w/w
Table 1 - Comparison of % EO concentration determinedfrom spectral and FID-DECRA analysis of low-field
1H NMR data (results for 5 of 13 samples shown)
References:[1] G. Woods, The ICI Polyurethanes Book, John Wiley & Sons,
Chichester, UK, 2nd edition, 1990, p. 362.[2] R.H. Carr, J. Hernalsteen, J. Devos, J. Appl. Polymer Sci. 52
(1994) 1015.[3] A. Nordon, C.A. McGill, D. Littlejohn, Appl. Spectrosc. 56 (2002)
75.[4] A. Nordon, C.A. McGill, D. Littlejohn, Spectroscopy Europe 13
(2001) 10.[5] W. Windig, B. Antalek, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 37 (1997)
241.[6] A. Nordon, P.J. Gemperline, C.A. McGill, D. Littlejohn, Anal.
Chem. 73 (2001) 4286.
Low-field 1H NMRHigh-field 13CNMR
15.4 ? 0.0415.5 ? 0.2315.4
15.5 ? 0.0915.5 ? 0.1615.5
15.3 ? 0.1215.8 ? 0.2315.2
15.2 ? 0.0815.4 ? 0.4315.115.1 ? 0.0615.2 ? 0.2315.1
FID-DECRA analysisSpectral analysis
Average EO concentration/(% w/w)
3
Ex-CPACT Researchers - Where are they now?
Manori joined CPACT Strathclyde in1998 as a postdoctoral fellow in theCPACT phase 1 project on ModelProcess Systems. She was involved inthe automation and control of reactorprocesses, system integration andreaction modelling. After moving to theUSA in 2000 she is currently workingfor AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals inWilmington, Delaware, where she isemployed as a scientist in the CompoundManagement and Automation section ofthe Lead Discovery department.
“At CPACT I was working in amultidisciplinary environment, which Ireally enjoyed. I think this experienceprepared me for my present employmentwhere I am one of the few engineersworking in a drug discovery departmentfilled with chemists and bio-scientists. Iam currently responsible for providing thelife scientists with chemical compoundsto aid the research for new drugs. Withmillions of compounds being screenedfor drug candidates every day, my workinvolves a lot of laboratory automationand system integration.”
Manori Turmel (nee Weerasinghe)
The Steering Committee isresponsible for all scientific andfinancial matters relating to theestablishment and running of theCPACT work programme. It comprises:
• The IMB Chairman• Three elected representatives from
Full Members• Two elected representatives from
Associate Members• Four representatives from the
University Members, with at least onefrom each University
The Steering Committee meet quarterlyto consider the general managementof CPACT and have been empoweredby the Industrial Management Board tomake decisions on their behalf. Thefollowing areas come under its remit:
• Technical progress and practicaldelivery of Projects
• Business and technical direction ofCPACT
• Co-ordination of funding and grantapplications
• Management of technology transfer;education and training
THE STEERINGCOMMITTEE
Steering Committee at Ross Priory June 2002
EPSRC AND INDUSTRYEPSRC, the Engineering andPhysical Sciences ResearchCouncil, is one of seven ResearchCouncils that invest money onbehalf of the Government inresearch in the UK. They investover £400 million each year inresearch and postgraduatetraining in the physical sciencesand engineering, so that the UKwill be prepared for the nextgeneration of technologicalchange. Their aim is to improvehealth, personal well-being andlifestyle.
EPSRC have recently adopted a newapproach to try and better align theirprogramme of research and trainingwith the needs of users. With this inmind the research portfolio has beensplit into a number of sectors andpersonnel assigned to cover eachsector. The sectors are:
• Transport• Defence• Bulk Materials and Products• Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals and
Biotechnology• Energy• Computers and Communications• Banking and Financial Services• Retail• Electronics• Machinery and Equipment• Construction and Environment• Healthcare• Food and Drink
The personnel in each sector havegathered information from EPSRC and
Some of the ways that EPSRC hasworked with industry in the pastare: joint funding of a chosen topicwithin the responsive mode; co-funding research chairs (with asubstantial support grant); co-funding of a major research centreand also through third partiessuch as Faraday partnerships ororganisations like CPACT. Theseare only examples and anypartnership mechanism will beconsidered subject only to theconstraints mentioned above. Theinputs from the industrial partnercould be in the form of a direct
cash contribution but other directinputs, such as equipment andmaterials and indirect inputs, such asstaff time or use of facilities availableat the industrial partner would beequally as valid.
There are a number of advantages thata company may obtain by collaborationamongst which are: leverage onresearch funds; shared risks/costs;access to research findings ahead ofcompetitors; access to skilled academicexperts ; the chance to meet youngengineers and scientists who might beconsidered for future employment.
For further information contactEmma Feltham, EPSRC.([email protected])The EPSRC would welcomecomment from industry on thesesector briefs and would also bewilling to visit and talk with anycompanies interested incollaboration.
external databases, personal contacts withtrade, professional bodies and individualcompanies to construct a sector brief.These are available from the EPSRC website (www.epsrc.ac.uk). The sector brieffor the Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals andBiotechnology sector can also be found onthe CPACT web site.
The EPSRC offers industry added valuethrough research portfolio management –using our strategic overview of UK physicalsciences and engineering. The processesused are open and flexible and have an inbuilt quality assurance that ensures thatonly the best of UK Engineering andScience is supported. The approach as tohow the research can be commissionedis flexible to the needs of the individualcompany or group of companies. The onlyconstraints are that they:
• Publicise their involvement• Use independent expert guidance to
help us make investment decisions• Normally invest through universities• Do not enter into exclusive agreements
Nicola Fletcher Colin McGill Alvaro Diez Lazaro
“Factors such as the cooperative workbetween industry and universities, thepractical research, the networking andthe testing of innovative technologymake CPACT a unique centre ofexcellence.
I personally experienced this during theunforgettable three years that I spent atStrathclyde University, where thestructure of the organization provided theperfect environment to continue myeducation. The skills I developed atCPACT were crucial at the time of gettinga job in The Dow Chemical Company, aleading company in process analyticalchemistry.
My current position involves thedevelopment and testing of newtechnologies for on-line monitoring. Iwork in a global team of more than 100people who play a key role in theanalytical issues related with theoptimisation and improvement of manyof the processes carried out mainly atthe Terneuzen site in The Netherlands.”
Colin McGill left his position as aResearch Fellow with CPACT at theUniversity of Strathclyde on 18 October2002. Colin worked with CPACT for a totalof 5 years, firstly as a PhD studentfollowed by 2 years as a Research Fellow.During his PhD studies, Colin wasinvolved in the development of a low-fieldNMR spectrometer for at-line and on-lineanalysis, and reaction monitoring by in-line Raman spectrometry. As a researchfellow, Colin continued his work inreaction monitoring, and used in-line NIRand MIR as well as Raman spectrometry.Colin was also the co-ordinator for theReal-time Monitoring of Bioprocessestheme and worked with GSK Worthingin the testing of analytical techniques ona fermentation reaction. He is nowworking in the process analysis team atAvecia in Grangemouth. His tasksinclude working with chemists to developmethods for monitoring chemical andphysical processes. However, he is nostranger to CPACT, acting as one ofAvecia’s representatives on currentCPACT projects.
Nicola joined CPACT Newcastle as aChemical Engineering graduate inSeptember 1999 and began a 3-yearindustrial PhD course based onmultivariate statistical process control ofbatch processes. Her research wasbased on a process at Pfizer and thislink built up her skills and experience ofworking in an industrial environment.She enjoyed this field of work anddecided that she would like a career inindustry where she could use not onlyher chemical engineering backgroundbut also her statistical skills developedthrough her PhD.
In September 2002 she joined GSKas a statistician based at one of theirmanufacturing sites in the UK. Her roleas part of the statistics team is as aconsultant to provide site wide statisticalsupport and to develop good statisticalworking practice for the manufacturingprocess.
“My PhD with CPACT gave me thestatistical skills without which I wouldnot have been able to do this challengingand rewarding job.”
Partnership
Policy£
Opinions£
KnowledgePeople
PUBLIC
Priorities£
GOVERNMENT ACADEMIA
INDUSTRYAND COMMERCE
EPSRC
Knowledge
EPSRC INTERACTIONS
VENDOR PROFILES
Members of CPACT enjoy the benefitsof
• shared cost research• multidisciplinary collaboration• immediate access to royalty-
free innovative technology• networking and benchmarking• professional development of
staff• access to trained and motivated
graduates
CPACT bridges the gap between scienceand engineering, academia andindustry, vendor and end-user.
Ian Wells, CPACT Board Representativefor one of its founder members says,“For Avecia the main benefit of being amember of CPACT has been therecruitment of key people (whom we havecome to know well and helped to developthrough the collaboration); thus creatingthe ultimate form of technology transfer.Being able to directly access anacademic research and technologyforum with resources greater than those
Although Thermo ONIX is a relatively newname in the world of process analysis,its product lines represent a combinedexperience of over 130 years in processanalytical instruments. They include FluidData (process sampling systems andanalysers), Houston Atlas (process andlaboratory sulphur analysers), UnicamChromatography (gas chromatographs)and VG GAS (process and laboratory gasanalysis mass spectrometers).
Thermo ONIX products solve keyanalytical problems in a wide variety ofprocess industries. It is part of ThermoElectron Corporation, a global leader intechnology-based instruments,components and systems that offerssolutions for markets ranging from lifesciences to telecommunications to foodand beverage production.
Specific Thermo ONIX applicationsinclude:
• In the petrochemical, chemical,pharmaceutical and iron and steel industries- process mass spectrometers for fast,precise, multi-stream, multi-component gasanalysis
• In the refining industry - pulsed UVfluorescence analysers for analysing totalsulphur from ppb to ppm levels, to meet theever-tightening restrictions on sulphur ingasoline, diesel and jet fuel.
• In the industrial and speciality gas industry -integrated gas analysis systems formonitoring product quality and impurity levelsin industrial, UHP and beverage-grade gases
Unicam and VG product lines are built inthe UK in Winsford, Cheshire; Fluid Dataand Houston Atlas products are built inHouston, Texas, with worldwide supportthrough a network of Thermocompanies or third party distributors. AsVG GAS, we joined CPACT in its first yearand have seen significant benefits fromthe interchange between academia,manufacturers and users that CPACTfacilitates.
For further information contact Graham Lewis, Thermo ONIX Europe.Email: [email protected] Phone: +44 (0)1606 548704
Why not join the Club?Administration Team Contacts
Prof Roger Benson,CPACT Honorary PresidentEmail: [email protected]
Contacts
Academic Contacts
Prof David Littlejohn,University of StrathclydeTel +44 141 548 2067Fax +44 141 548 4212Email: [email protected]
Prof Julian Morris,University of NewcastleTel +44 191 222 7342Fax +44 191 222 5748Email: [email protected]
Prof Elaine Martin,University of NewcastleTel +44 191 222 6231Fax +44 191 222 5748Email: [email protected]
Dr Tony Walmsley,University of HullTel +44 1482 465470Fax +44 1482 466416Email: [email protected]
Umetrics UK Ltd is the British subsidiaryof the Swedish company Umetrics AB.They are experts in data analysis andmarket software solutions and trainingcourses to help scientists and engineersmaximise the value of their data. Theircustomers come from a range ofindustrial sectors includingpharmaceutical, biotech, fine chemical,powertrain and food.
Umetrics’ flagship software products areSIMCA-P for multivariate analysis andMODDE for design of experiments.Licensing options range from singleuser to unlimited implementation - theUmetrics Enterprise Platform. Thenumber of companies opting for theEnterprise Platform solution has growndramatically since its introduction twoyears ago. It is the hassle-free, costeffective way of embedding thesestrategic technologies into companies.
With regard to process analysis,Umetrics markets two on-line variantsof SIMCA-P designed for use by processengineers and operators:
1. SIMCA-Batch On-Line (SBOL) formonitor ing and model l ing batchprocesses.
2. SIMCA-4000 for monitoring andmodelling continuous processes.
Umetrics now also offer a predictionsolution called SIMCA-QP which allowsusers to obtain predictions from theirmodels in real time. Ideal for reactionmonitoring, for example, and a greatopportunity for OEMs to link the power oftheir instruments to the power ofmultivariate analysis.
Access to their methods is simple:they run regular residential courses andcan provide in-house training at shortnotice.
On the subject of CPACT membership,Oliver says:
“Membership of CPACT has beeninvaluable in keeping us aware ofthe latest developments in processanalytics whilst simultaneouslyallowing us to hear the needs andconcerns of customers.”
UMETRICS SITE, WINDSOR
VENDOR COMPANY PROFILES
For further information, contact Oliver Whelehan at: Umetrics UK Ltd, Woodside House, Winkfield, Windsor, SL4 2DX Tel: 01344 885605 Fax: 01344 885410 Email: [email protected]
that could be normally expected from anindustrial/academic link has provenuseful”.
Angela BottSecretaryCPACT NewcastleTel +44 191 222 5785Fax +44 191 222 5748Email: [email protected]
Natalie DriscollTeam Co-ordinatorCPACT StrathclydeTel +44 141 548 4836Fax +44 141 548 4713Email: [email protected]
Carol BadgerAdministration ManagerCPACT StrathclydeTel +44 141 548 4728Fax +44 141 548 4713Email: [email protected]
Events andConference News
Other highlights over the past 6 months:• Julian Morris presented at the UKAP
Conference on Product and ProcessCompetitiveness.
• The Newcastle Group attended IFAC2002, Barcelona; ESCAPE-12,European Symposium on ComputerAided Process Engineering-12, TheNetherlands; ESANN 2002, Belgium;American Control Conference, ACC2002, Alaska (USA); 4 th InternationalConference on Quality, Reliability andMaintenance, QRM 2002, Oxford.Details on any of these conferences
can be obtained from Angela Bott(a.m. [email protected]).
• The Eighth Chemometrics inAnalytical Chemistry Conference inSeattle, USA, in September 2002 wasattended by Elaine Martin and TonyWalmsley. Elaine gave a keynotepresentation “Needle in a Haystack– A Challenge to Chemometricians”with Tony being responsible fororganising and chairing one of thesessions on chemometrics.
• David Littlejohn gave 2 invited lecturesand a poster paper at the 30th annualconference of the Federation ofAnalytical Chemistry andSpectroscopy Societies (FACSS),held in Providence, Rhode Island,USA on 13-18 October 2002. Thetopics covered in the presentationsincluded in-reactor processmonitoring by mid-infraredspectrometry, non-invasivespectroscopic analysis of afermentation process and on-lineanalysis of gaseous systems bymass spectrometry.
David has been invited to join theorganising committee for the 2003FACSS conference to be held in FortLauderdale, Florida in 19-24 October2003. He will have specificresponsibility for co-ordination ofprocess analysis sessionsthroughout the meeting.
Over the past few months CPACT hasbeen represented at many conferencesand events. Key presentations have beengiven at the following:
• A seminar on the subject of energyconservation in the chemical andrelated industries was organised byAJM Consulting on 14 November 2002at their offices at Europarc in NorthEast Lincolnshire.
CPACT was represented by ElaineMartin, University of Newcastle, whogave a presentation on Advanced DataReduction for Increased EnergyEfficiency.
CPACT Honorary President, RogerBenson, also gave a talk onperfomance measurement throughenergy benchmarking.
Dr Frank Cottee, CPACT ChairmanTel: +44 1732 372274Email: [email protected]