Successfully reported this slideshow.

ARC's Tom Fiske APC Best Practices Presentation @ 2009 ARC Industry Forum

360 views

Published on

ARC's Tom Fiske APC Best Practices Presentation @ 2009 ARC Industry Forum in Orlando, FL.
APC and Local Optimization
Definitions
APC
• Online real-time control
• Popular method: linear multivariable control
Optimization
• Online real-time to determine optimum setpoints
• Rigorous first-principle models
• Empirical models
• Offline or open loop for advisory
• Rigorous or empirical models
• Ad-hoc analytic tools
• Statistical methods
The purpose of the research was to develop an
understanding of how process manufacturers around
the world are using APC to create a sustainable
competitive advantage. The survey was designed to
capture information about the current status of APC
usage.

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ARC's Tom Fiske APC Best Practices Presentation @ 2009 ARC Industry Forum

  1. 1. APC Best PracticeAPC Best PracticeTom FiskeSenior AnalystARC Advisory Grouptfiske@arcweb comtfiske@arcweb.com
  2. 2. AgendaAgendaAPC OverviewMarket PerspectiveMarket PerspectiveAPC Best PracticeSummarySummary2© ARC Advisory Group
  3. 3. APC and Local OptimizationAPC and Local OptimizationDefinitionsAPC• Online real-time control• Popular method: linear multivariable controlOptimization• Online real-time to determine optimum setpoints• Rigorous first-principle models• Empirical models• Offline or open loop for advisoryO e o ope oop o ad so y• Rigorous or empirical models• Ad-hoc analytic tools• Statistical methods3© ARC Advisory Group• Statistical methods
  4. 4. Types and Value of APCTypes and Value of APCReal-time OptimizationlueasingValNonlinear MultivariableControl&IncreaControlLinear Multivariable ControlOther Supervisory ControlMethodsInferential SensorsngEffortAdvanced RegulatoryControlRegulatory Controlncreasin4© ARC Advisory GroupRegulatory ControlIn
  5. 5. Advanced Predictive Control Reduces VarianceAdvanced Predictive Control Reduces VarianceVariance Reduction allows Processes to OperateCloser to Limits or ConstraintsCloser to Limits or ConstraintsSpecification LimitTargetpecificationBefore APC After APC Move closer to limitSp5© ARC Advisory Group
  6. 6. Benefits of Control and OptimizationBenefits of Control and Optimization100Process Control Contribution100100Process Control Contributionst%708090Process Control Contributionst%708090st%708090Process Control ContributionModelPredictive>20%Real-timeOptimized>25%CapitalCos405060ModelPredictive>20%ModelPredictive>20%Real-timeOptimized>25%CapitalCos405060CapitalCos405060>20%C102030RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%>20%>20%C102030C102030RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%RegulatoryBasic>45%Adv>10%APC & O ti i ti B fit 3 5 7% f T t l A l G P fitPotential Performance Improvement0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000Potential Performance Improvement0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Potential Performance Improvement0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100006© ARC Advisory GroupAPC & Optimization Benefit: 3.5 – 7% of Total Annual Gross Profits
  7. 7. Creating and Sustaining ValueCreating and Sustaining ValueContinuousImprovementueTargetBenefitsp oRevenTimestS t i dCosTime to RevenueSustainedPerformanceImproved7© ARC Advisory GroupTime to Revenue
  8. 8. ScopeScopeThe purpose of the research was to develop anunderstanding of how process manufacturers aroundthe world are using APC to create a sustainablethe world are using APC to create a sustainablecompetitive advantage. The survey was designed tocapture information about the current status of APCusage.ARC received about 50 responses from the survey onAPC usageAPC usage.8© ARC Advisory Group
  9. 9. Characteristics of Research RespondentsRespondent come from a variety of industriesOthers, 4.1%Food & Bev, 2.0%Pharmaceutical,4.1%Power, 6.1%Power, 6.1%Mining &Metals,8.2%Oil & Gas, 10.2%Chemicals, 24.5%Petrochemical,18.4%Refining, 22.4%The majority come from heavy process big APC users9© ARC Advisory GroupThe majority come from heavy process – big APC users
  10. 10. Ranking of Research RespondentsARC best practice reports group responses into thecategories of Leaders, Competitors, and Followers. Overten separate performance criteria were used to rank theresponses.RankingLeader Top 20%Competitor Next 50%Follower Last 30%For each survey response, each of the performance criteriawas given a quantitative measurement and the total usedki d i10© ARC Advisory Groupas a ranking demarcation.
  11. 11. Organizational Aspects – APC ImplementationNumber of APC ApplicationsLeadersFollowersCompetitors0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Followers0 5 6 10 11 25 25User’s Perspective• About 22 % of users believe APC provides a competitive advantageAb t 78% f b li APC i t i titi0-5 6-10 11-25 25+11© ARC Advisory Group• About 78% of users believe APC is necessary to remain competitiveLeaders: APC culture & Adopt BP
  12. 12. Organizational Aspects – APC ImplementationAPC Outsourcing StrategyLeadersCompetitorsFollowers0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Less than 25% Between 25 and 50% Between 50 and 75% Over 75%12© ARC Advisory GroupLeaders: View APC as competitive Advantage, they have moreinternal resources and outsource less
  13. 13. Organizational Aspects – APC ImplementationUse of Internal Resources during ImplementationLeadersCompetitorsFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Dedicated Teams Manufacturing Staff EngineeringStaff Other13© ARC Advisory Group
  14. 14. APC Maintenance MethodologyAPC Maintenance MethodologyAPC Outsourcing StrategyCompetitorsLeadersFollowersp0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Lessthan 25% Between 25 and 50% Between 50 and 75% Over 75%14© ARC Advisory Group
  15. 15. APC Maintenance MethodologyAPC Maintenance MethodologyInternal ResourcesEmerging Best Practice CriteriaAPC Applications/ APC Expert0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%APC Expert CertificaionYes NoAPC Applications/Expert range typically range15© ARC Advisory Grouppp / p g yp y gbetween 5 and 10 depending upon its complexity
  16. 16. APC Maintenance MethodologyAPC Maintenance MethodologyUse of Internal Resources for MaintenanceCompetitorsLeadersFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Dedicated Teams Manufacturing Staff EngineeringStaff16© ARC Advisory Group
  17. 17. RTO Implementation MethodologyRTO Implementation MethodologyNumber of RTO ApplicationsLeadersF llCompetitors0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%FollowersUser’s Perspective• About 30 % of users believe RTO provides a competitive advantage0 1-2 3-5 over 517© ARC Advisory GroupAbout 30 % of users believe RTO provides a competitive advantage• About 70% of users believe RTO enables more effective manufacturing
  18. 18. RTO Implementation MethodologyRTO Implementation MethodologyRTO Outsourcing StrategyCompetitorsLeadersFollowers0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Lessthan 25% Between 25 and 50% Between 50 and 75% Over 75%18© ARC Advisory GroupLeaders more heavily involved in Implementing RTO
  19. 19. Focus Areas for APC Current and Future UseFocus Areas for APC Current and Future UseAPC Focus Areas for Various SituationsLarge Cont. Units Large Cont. UnitsLarge Units: AbnormalSmall Units: TransitionsLarge Units: TranisitionsSmall Cont. UnitsLeadersLarge Units: AbnormalSmall Units: TransitionsLarge Units: TranisitionsSmall Cont. UnitsCompetitiors0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Small Units: AbnormalLarge Units: AbnormalDeployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plans0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Small Units: AbnormalLarge Units: AbnormalDeployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No PlansSmall Cont. UnitsLarge Cont. Unitss• Note: These charts doi diSmall Units: AbnormalLarge Units: AbnormalSmall Units: TransitionsLarge Units: TranisitionsFollowersnot indicate percentsaturation. The chartsshow only that usersare deploying or planto deploy APC on someprocess units in theindicated category19© ARC Advisory Group0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Deployed Being Deployed Short-term Long-term No Plans
  20. 20. Adoption Level of APCAdoption Level of APCCurrent Level of APC Adoption for Continuous ProcessesLeadersCompetitorsAllFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Large Units/Plants Small-Midsize Units/Plants20© ARC Advisory Groupg
  21. 21. Adoption Level of APCAdoption Level of APCCurrent Level of APC Adoption for TransitionManagement in Continuous ProcessesManagement in Continuous ProcessesCompetitorsLeadersAllFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%All21© ARC Advisory GroupLarge Units/Plants Small-Midsize Units/Plants
  22. 22. Adoption Level of APCAdoption Level of APCCurrent Level of APC Adoption for Abnormal Situationsin Continuous Processesin Continuous ProcessesCompetitorsLeadersAllFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%All22© ARC Advisory GroupLarge Units/Plants Small-Midsizde Units/Plants
  23. 23. APC Techniques vs. Objectives for Non-Steady StateAPC Techniques vs. Objectives for Non-Steady StateTransition Management is Becoming Competitive AdvantageOperator Guidance Sequence ControlS f C id i Safety ConsiderationImprove QualityIncrease ThroughputIncrease Energy SavingsSafety ConsiderationImprove QualityIncrease ThroughputIncrease Energy SavingsSafety Consideration0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Man-Hour SavingFaster Swith OverVery Important Important Somewhat Important Less Important Not Important0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Man-Hour SavingFaster Swith OverVery Important Important Somewhat Important LessImportant Not ImportantModel Predictive ControlIncrease Energy SavingsSafety ConsiderationFaster Swith OverImprove QualityIncrease Throughputgy g23© ARC Advisory Group0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Man-Hour SavingVery Important Important Somewhat Important LessImportant Not Important
  24. 24. Focus Areas for Online Opt. Current and Future UseFocus Areas for Online Opt. Current and Future UseOnline Optimization Focus Area for Various SituationsLarge Units Large UnitsDyn OptSmall UnitsLarge UnitsLeadersDyn OptSmall UnitsLarge UnitsCompetitiors0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%BatchDeployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plans0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%BatchDeployed Being Deployed Short-term Long-term No PlansSmall UnitsLarge Unitss• Note: These charts doi diBatchDyn OptSmall UnitsFollowersnot indicate percentsaturation. The chartsshow only that usersare deploying or planto deploy OnlineOptimization on someprocess units in thei di t d t24© ARC Advisory Group0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Deployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plansindicated category
  25. 25. Adoption Level of Online OptimizationAdoption Level of Online OptimizationCurrent Level of Adoption for Online Optimization forVarious SituationsVarious SituationsCompetitorsLeadersAllFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%All25© ARC Advisory GroupLarge Units Small Units Dynamic Optimization Batch Optimization
  26. 26. Adoption Level of APCAdoption Level of APCCurrent Level of APC Adoption for Batch ProcessesLeadersCompetitorsAllFollowers0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Soft Sensors Profile Control Run-to-Run Control MPC26© ARC Advisory GroupSoft Sensors Profile Control Run to Run Control MPC
  27. 27. Controller PerformanceController PerformanceControl Performance Deteriorates Over Time10% Continuous Improvementwith Online MonitoringAPC Performancefits25% Good SupportWith No Online MonitoringAPC PerformancedegradationBene40% Poor SupportAPC Turned OnppNo Online Monitoring27© ARC Advisory GroupTime
  28. 28. Adoption Level and Focus Areas for ControlPerformance MonitoringAdoption Level and Focus Areas for ControlPerformance MonitoringControl Performance Monitoring FocusRegulatoryAPCCompetitorsRegulatoryAPCLeaders0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Deployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plans0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%g yDeployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plans• Note: These charts donot indicate that usersAPC• About 40% of userscurrently useRegulatory Performance deploy performancemonitoring tools on allof its regulatory andAPC applications, butrather a portion of itscontrol applicationsRegulatoryFollowersRegulatory PerformanceMonitoring Applications• Approximately 30% ofusers currently use APCPerformance Monitoring28© ARC Advisory Group0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%Deployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No PlansPerformance MonitoringApplications
  29. 29. Adoption Level and Focus Areas for ControlPerformance MonitoringAdoption Level and Focus Areas for ControlPerformance MonitoringPerformance Monitoring: COTS vs. In-House DevelopmentAPCLeadersAPCCompetitors0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%RegulatoryCOT In-House Combination0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%RegulatoryCOT In-House Combination• Note: These charts donot indicate that usersAPC• About 40% of userscurrently useRegulatory Performance not indicate that usersdeploy performancemonitoring tools on allof its regulatory andAPC applications, butrather a portion of itscontrol applicationsRegulatoryFollowersRegulatory PerformanceMonitoring Applications• Approximately 30% ofusers currently use APCPerformance Monitoring29© ARC Advisory Group0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%COT In-House CombinationPerformance MonitoringApplications
  30. 30. Plant Database ApplicationsPlant Database ApplicationsCurrent Level of Automation Integration for Plant Applications and DatabasesUsed for Process Control and OperationsPAM PAMAlarmHistoryMOCLIMSPAMLeadersAlarmHistoryMOCLIMSPAMCompetitiors0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%ProcessData StorageFully Integrates BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No Plans0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%ProcessData StorageFully Integrates BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No PlansLIMSPAMersProcessData StorageAlarmHistoryMOCFollowe30© ARC Advisory Group0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Fully Integrates BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No Plans
  31. 31. Control Performance MonitoringControl Performance MonitoringKey Performance Indicators for Control MonitoringRegulatory Control Advanced Process ControlPrediction Accuracy% UtiliztionPrediction Accuracy% Utiliztion% Loopsat LimitControl Accuracy% Loopsat LimitControl Accuracy0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%% LoopsNormalVery Important Important Somewhat Important LessImportant Not Important0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%% LoopsNormalVery Important Important Somewhat Important LessImportant Not Important31© ARC Advisory Group
  32. 32. Control Performance MonitoringControl Performance MonitoringKey Performance Indicators for Control MonitoringAdvanced Process ControlLeadersFollowersCompetitors0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%APC % Utilization32© ARC Advisory GroupAPC % Utilization
  33. 33. Plant Database ApplicationsPlant Database ApplicationsCurrent Level of Adoption and Functionality of Alarm ManagementApplicationsAlarmFilteringState Based AlarmingAlarmAnalysis: Root CauseReducingStanding AlarmsReducingPeak AlarmsLeadersAlarmFilteringState Based AlarmingAlarmAnalysis: Root CauseReducingStanding AlarmsReducingPeak Alarmsompetitiors0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%AlarmHistoryAlarmAnalysis: FrequencyAlarmAnalysis: CombinationDeployed BeingIntegrated Short term Long term No Plans0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%AlarmHistoryAlarmAnalysis: FrequencyAlarmAnalysis: CombinationCDeployed BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No PlansDeployed BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No Plans Deployed BeingIntegrated Short term Long term No PlansAlarmAnalysis: Root CauseReducingStanding AlarmsReducingPeak AlarmsAlarmHistoryAlarmAnalysis: FrequencyAlarmAnalysis: CombinationAlarmFilteringState Based AlarmingAlarmAnalysis: Root CauseFollowers33© ARC Advisory Group0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Deployed BeingIntegrated Short-term Long-term No Plans
  34. 34. Plant Database ApplicationsPlant Database ApplicationsPlant Database IntegrationPlant Database Integration for OperatorAssistance and Decision Support Adoption of Data Analysis TechnologiesEffi i M it iSensor DiagnosticsPerformance MonitoringQCImprove QCID Key ProcessFactorsEstimate Key Properties0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Control MonitoringPV-MV CorrelationEfficiency Monitoring0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Abnormal Situation DetectionImprove Batch OpsDeployed Being Integrated Short-term Long-term No Plans% % % % % %Deployed BeingDeployed Short-term Long-term No Plans34© ARC Advisory Group
  35. 35. Th k YTh k YThank YouThank You35© ARC Advisory Group

×