Smart technologies for smarter production

It almost goes without saying, but most process industry plants are very different to most discrete manufacturing factories. Beyond the facts of managing and handling ‘wet’ fluids – many aggressive or downright dangerous – involved in all manner of reactions in all kinds of vessels involving numerous processes, there tend to be much higher levels of automation and the small matter of monitoring and controlling multiple and continuous variables. Measurement, management and control of all that bears little resemblance to your average machine shop. Also, since process plants are highly capital intensive, often highly (although not uniformly) automated and commonly also hazardous (involving hazardous materials and products), their management tends to be about flat-out safe production and maintenance – with linked business and plant floor processes. For example, plant asset management becomes a joint priority involving business (MRO (maintenance, repair and operations) materials procurement and fiscal controls) and plant maintenance, troubleshooting and operations management – with systems integration to match. Meanwhile, from a planning and scheduling perspective, where discrete factory operations tend to revolve around numerous components leading to relatively few assemblies and products (although with increasingly variable configurations), process industries turn that analysis on its head. Chief characteristics are few ingredients, fairly simple formulations, but potentially complex operations and routes leading to numerous intermediates and even more numerous final products potentially spanning sites and supply chains. So there’s a different kind of complexity – akin to that tackled by ‘mass customisation’ initiatives. It’s not just that there are more flexible plants today – where many different bulk products are generated from the same plant resources. Sequencing of production, changeovers, cleaning and the rest, with automated cycles, manual operations and material flows in controlled conditions is, after all, comparable (from a systems point of view) to scheduling an extrusion hall or a substantial machine shop. What’s different is the nature of scaled-up chemical process production and the fact of driving all that to optimise productivity against potentially changing demand, attempting to push plant ever closer to the wire. And don’t forget the inevitable – and sometimes substantial – recycling or rework loops, as well as auxiliary plant providing material treatments and feeds, utilities, waste handling and so on. That’s not to say the process industries command the corner on complexity – they don’t: there are just important differences that have evolved different management strategies and pushed different systems and IT to the top of the business and operations agenda. Key issues include integration up and down the business to plant IT hierarchy; plant manufacturing execution (MES) and automation systems; associated instrumentation and control devices; digital plant communications; and asset/maintenance management systems. You’ll notice that ERP, while important, isn’t by any means always top dog. As Chris Garton, business engineering manager at Ineos Chlor (formerly ICI Chlor Chemicals) says, making admin even more efficient ultimately pales into insignificance against achieving even 1% more production when you consider process volumes. His company, with 80% of its production in Runcorn, makes commodity chlorine-based chemicals, so its drivers are safety, health, the environment – and running the plant flat out while cutting costs. For Garton, achieving that means focusing on the plant automation and control systems absolutely including the newer breed of intelligent instrumentation – and integrating all of that. He describes a jigsaw of integrated systems with intelligent plant devices at the sharp end; Emerson’s DeltaV plant management system for the SCADA, Aspen IP21 for process and business information management, and at the business end, SSA GT’s BPCS ERP system all talking in real time. By way of example, the C&I kit maintains pressure, while DeltaV signals controls, Aspen totalises usage and BPCS looks after the accounts. Not that long ago, you’d have been looking at a paper chase of people and processes. Now, at Ineos it’s all on automated workflow driving email and text messages, so that everyone that needs to know does. Garton says that at the business level, integration means that from his laptop he can see all the key performance indicators he needs to drive the business – and drill down on those where necessary from his own consistent interface. “I can see the plants’ running rates, key parameters, raw materials, intermediates, products…” And it’s linked to email and text messaging. “I get a text message at 6.00am with all the numbers, so I know immediately what’s going on.” And information relevant to roles throughout the plant is similarly available from their systems. But Garton repeats that for him what makes most difference in IT terms is down at the plant itself. “We’re a manufacturing company, so whatever helps us to make more chemicals of better quality at reduced cost of production is what makes the difference. Better ERP means better joined up business processes, better customer service, better tracking and managing of your fixed and variable assets. But better dynamic control is fundamental, and the ERP world has stood still compared to the control world.” He’s got a point: development at this level has been phenomenal. “A few years ago control valves hadn’t changed significantly in 30 years. But in the last five, we’ve seen massive change, with micro engineering, intelligence in the devices and new communications.” And the same is true of motors and instrument transmitters of all kinds – intelligence and digital plant communications have transformed device monitoring and diagnostics. By the same token, plant control systems like DeltaV have also improved. Garton observes, for example, that while there are still some geometric process controllers and expert systems running advanced process control algorithms on site, they’re few. “Most of the benefits have been transferred into DeltaV running, for example, fuzzy logic,” he says. These, and the analysis tools now available, all make plant technical resources much more productive. Garton comments, for example, that a process loop can now be re-tuned in 20 minutes – something that took days before. What’s more the systems guide diagnostics – and show whether re-tuning will help or fundamental plant redesign or process change is required. “Abortive work just disappears,” he says. And the same applies to automatic control valves. Before smart technology, 40% of valves pulled for maintenance during plant shutdown would be found to have no problem, so shouldn’t have been removed – and, to add insult to injury, on plant start-up some of those would then fail as a result of the work. Modern diagnostics have put an end to that. “We’ve had some spectacular wins here with the smart control valves,” says Garton. In fact, Ineos Chlor’s approach to capitalising on all this has been to enter a strategic alliance with controls giant Emerson, not only standardising on its products (computer systems, control valves, electric motors and instrumentation), but treating the firm as a solutions partner responsible for provision and improvement. Garton suggests it’s solved operational and business problems, provided integrated support and given measurable business advantage. He says that, with the range of kit from multiple vendors, there was more effort going into integration than business benefit, and that “30% of our instruments were adding to the instability of our plants, not their smooth running.” Why? Because cost cutting in the process industries has long seen the demise of instrument engineering departments, with the result that poor advice has gone unchecked. “It’s the result of suppliers selling us kit, not offering solutions,” says Garton. The deal with Emerson means buying power and a lifecycle/solution approach, as well as instant integration. “There have been all sorts of cost wins… Now we have Emerson Resources on site, they’re in at the design stage, they’re involved in specification, and while a third party will do the installation, they commission the systems with us and help us manage them… We’re now buyers of service.” And his point: Ineos Chlor’s core competence is producing chorine products; if that means changing or improving the C&I, that’s Emerson’s problem.