PROCESS AND PLANT OPTIMIZATION SPECIALREPORT

Are you getting the full

benefits from your advanced
process control systems?
Myths about automation programs prevent
companies from unleashing their full profit potential
W. M. CANNEY, Aspen Technology, Inc., Houston, Texas
G
lobally, many operating companies are reaping sub-
stantial benefits from advanced process control (APC)
systems. Most majors in the refining and chemical/pet-
rochemical industries have extensively, successfully, and now
routinely applied APC technology ro their largest proccs.sing
units. The most widely used incarnation of AI'C is model predic-
tive control (MPC) with its capabilities to deal with interactive
process variables, model complex dynamic response, maintain
the process at operating limits, and reliably respond to process
disturbances and upsets.
Even with an installed base of over 6,000 applications (count-
ing medium- to large-scale), some users believe that much of the
"low hanging fruit" for APC has been harvested. This assump-
tion is misleading. APC for major processing units (e.g., crude
and vacuum, FCC, reformer, etc.) is now recognized as an indus-
try best practice. However, secondary, specialty, upstream and
utility units offer attractive opportunities for obtaining eco-
nomic benefits from APC. Additionally, APC systems have been
applied at some of the world's largest facilities and extensively
in the US. Internationally and at smaller facilities, a significant
opportunity for APC benefits still exists.
So what prohibits the continued growth of APC?
As in other business and technology sectors, the underlying
business model, available technology and operating en\'ironment
have significantly changed over time. Of course, an understand-
ing of these changes, or more accurately a misunderstanding,
creates the mindset for what was once an industry "truth" to
become a "myth." Myths cloud APC value opportunities for
future users.
One example is the shift in APC user needs from project
deployment to a focus on maintenance. While the number
of new APC projects in traditional applications has flattened
or decreased slightly, spending on APC has increased as users
maintain and improve existing applications. With an extensive
installed base and a market with a constrained skill set, this
shift is understandable. Growth of APC applications in several
nontraditional industrial segments (e.g., polymers and specialty
chemicals) is at double-digit levels.
Misinterpretation of other industry characteristics and trends
can create myths about how and where to obtain value from
APC
Benefits
= (Optimum-Current operation) X
/ Capability of \ /Expertise of the\ /Reliability of \
I technology to J [ implementation | j APC project |
^capture benefits j \ team / \ mefhodoiogy /
1 / \ / \ / \
Success factors for maximizing APC benefits.
these applications. APC users are driven by prevailing business
needshow to gain a competitive advantage with low risk,
high reward, low capital outlay and minimal resource-consum-
ing initiatives. APC has clearly demonstrated a connection to
these business drivers. Such projects deliver high value with
minimal capital investment, providing issues associated with
risk and required resources are addressed. Here's a discussion of
15 myths that impair the economic value opportunity available
from APC applications.
Myth 1: APC is a commodit y. This myth implies that
cost is the only criterion for project selection. This assumption
is far from the experience of successful users. Project success is
directly attributable to tbe skill, experience and toolset of the
implementation team. Nearly all unsuccessful projects can be
attributed to a lack of these attributes.
APC implementation is a commodity product, as heart sur-
gery is a common medical procedure. Yes, heart surgery is done
everyday and is practiced by a large contingent ot individuals.
However, the risks and benefits for any one case are highly
attributable to the individual practitioner, their experience,
methodology and tools applied.
The skill of the lead implementer is a significant factor affect-
ing the success of the project. Using an established project meth-
odology developed and proven over a large number of previ-
ous projectsis the key to containing costs and minimizing
risk. Selecting an APC technology that connects directly with
the skill of the implementer and reflects the project methodol-
ogy ensures that the desired benefits will be achieved.
HYDR0CAR80N PROCESSING JUNE 2005 55
SPECIALREPORT PROCESS AND PLANT OPTIMIZATION
1980*s 1985's 199O's 2OOO's
Required
proof of
Technology Benefits Scale Long-term
proposition sustain performance
PI programs
best practices
integration
First-of-a-kind
largest applications
Number of
applications
enefits for Operators
Challenges in Instrumentation
Project
Business case
Business unit
Project
management
standards
Enterprise
Available man-power
communications
FKS. 2 Progression of large-scale APCbenefits and challenges.
Myth 2: APC projects are less successful than they
were fi ve years ago. Success of APC projects is signifi-
cantly greater than at any other time. With an established track
record in many industries, first-of-a-kind projects are less novel
and are less frequently reported. Applications in new industry
segments are oFten driven by gaining a competitive advantage
and frequently considered too proprietary to report. The attrac-
tive value opportunity provided by APC has also attracted less
capable, less experienced, commodity-minded approaches that
are destined for failure.
A simple, practical approach when working with an APC
technology supplier is to invest the time speaking with other
customers and reviewing applications that the supplier (and
it possible your proposed implementer) has completed. No
track record corresponds to a poor track record and even greater
project risk.
Myth 3: You cannot trust vendors/consultants.
APC suppliers and consultants are largely similar to vendors in
other engineering-related areas. There is a distribution of skills,
integrity and motivation. Most experienced and successful APC
users confirm that a relationship model based on a partnership
between operating company and technology supplier is the best
long-term approach. If you cant trust your vendor, you have the
wrong vendor.
Trust is based on an established track record for deliver-
ing successful applications and addressing important customer
issues. In addition, successful users strive to "make the vendor
work for you." The vendor should collect relevant data, provide
important information, respond to important issues, provide
access to technical resources, and invest in detailed proposal
preparation and studies. Leading vendors will deliver on these
Items; thus eliminating some project risk, hivest in the vendor
and make them invest in you.
M yth 4: I should select a technology provider and
then select the implementer. For the reasons mentioned
earlier, selecting the vendor, technology implementer and meth-
odology simultaneotisly is the recommended
approach. Rarely is the success for a given
APC project solely attributable to the par-
ticular vendor. The individuals who apply
this technology are a major deciding factor
in a project's outcome. It is unrealistic to
expect the same level of expertise, invested
man-hours and application scope as cost is
pushed on new projects (i.e., vendors are
made to largely compete on price).
Pushing price and improving return-on-
investment (ROl) are a given. However, it
is important to understand what you are
getting. As man-hours are decreased, proj-
ect risk increases and project deliverables
go down. Quality-to-cost and risk-to-cost
trade-offs are made either explicitly or
miplicitly.
The attractive ROIs from APC projects
provide margins for negotiating. If you are
willing to pay more, you can generate lower
project risk and greater benefits. Competi-
tive issues aside, the application's cost and the projected benefits
to be generated are directly related. Scope, the number of value-
generating process operating strategies and process variables
included within the application should be carefully evaluated.
Myth 5: Choose a small, safe process unit for the
first application. While the principle of creating an early
success to propel future projects is appreciated, little is proven
unless significant benefits are generated and noted technical
challenges are addressed. The easiest APC benefits are mined
from large-capacity processes, where the benefits-per-unit mul-
tiplier is rhe greatest. Picking a small process application does
not necessarily diminish the risk.
Complexity in APC applications is often not directly asso-
ciated with capacity. The same effort is applied to a small as
well as a large capacity project. For a large-capacity unit, small
processing improvements can easily justify the project. In addi-
tion, efficiency improvements associated with methodology and
deployment decrease the cost of fiiture projects on lower capacity
units. The real issue is demonstrating benefits that cannot be
captured by any other means. Systematically addressing noted
operational challenges is the power of APC technology (includ-
ing methodology and implementer).
Myth 6: The lowest risk way to do APC projects is
to justify them one at a time. 1 his depends on the risk
that you are trying to lower. If it is money, this is the wrong
approach. In the early days of APC technology, project selection
(which process unit to do first) was the key issue. Currently,
most companies with established APC technology are driven
toward a programmatic approach where the benefits from APC
are obtained through a broad systematic effort to apply the
technology to a series of plants or applications. The refining
and chemical/petrochemical industries have reported many
recent success stories. Project cost reductions of 30-50% vs. an
individual project approach report and improved ROI. The pro-
grammatic approach offers better economics largely because the
detailed justification and selection phases are greatly reduced.
56 JUNE 2005 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
PROCESS AND PLANT OPTI MI ZATI ON
Additional savings can be obtained when the user can lever-
age expertise and address manpower constraints over a number of
projects, directly apply best practices and knowledge from previ-
ous projects, and systematically address organizational issues (i.e.,
training, maintenance and performance metrics). A programmatic
approach also provides quick business relevance, as the multiplier
on the benefits number previously discussed for a single plant,
now represents the sum for a series of plants.
M yth 7: I don't have the control expertise to con-
sider doing an APC project. The critical success factor for a
properly constructed APC project is process unit expertise rather
than control expertise. The expertise required to be an APC user
is substantially different than the expertise required to implement
projects. APC projects bave very attractive ROIs. Well-designed
and capable tools and implementers can ensure project success.
What these implementers cannot bring to the table is the under-
standing of the operational and basic business issues that are
specific to the processing unit. Implementers can provide a pack-
aged application or train the user on how to produce the necessary
components for a successful APC installation.
Users quickly adapt to leveraging a well-designed APC sys-
tem for improved operational and economic benefits. The most
frequent users of the APC installation will always be the chemi-
cal process operator (as opposed to a process or control engineer
or tbe system implementer). Their ability to effectively use
APC systems demonstrated hy success in chemical process units
throughout the world for a variety of industries, plant sizes and
complexities.
M yth 8: No other APC user with a process such as
mine will discuss this application with me. Frequently
in new application areas, this myth has some literal truth. But
what is unknown to most inexperienced users is how the leading
APC products provide a generic process solution to each specific
plant. Comparing plants in the same industry is often not as rel-
evant as comparing plants with the same business and operational
challenges (e.g., frequent disturbances, grade changes, changing
feed, capacity constraints, limited operator capabilities). The
greater danger is extrapolating benefits from a plant of the same
process type to another facility that has substantially different
business and operational challenges.
Myth 9: My process has too many instrumentation
issues to consider APC. APC utilizes the instrumentation
tbat produces the greatest impact on processing economics and
provides tbe most information concerning reliable operation.
Poor instrumentation is not an issue solely for AI'C. It is an issue
for poor process operations. A well-designed APC benefits study
or "pre-test" {initial technical investigation of the plant) can
quantify the improvement in operations available from repair-
ing, replacing or adding process instrumentation.
Given equal instrumentation (and less the cases of random
catastrophic instrumentation failure), APC will always outper-
form manual operation in most processing units. The recom-
mended approach when lnsrrumentation issues dominate pro-
cess operations is to do a study, along the lines of the first steps
of established APC methodology, detailing and quantifying the
benefits of specific instrumentation repairs. The APC paradigm
provides specific motivation and purpose to recommended
repairs, whether APC is to be subsequently used or not. If the
process is not due for a turnaround, quantifying the benefits and
what is to be done is even more important.
M yth 10: APC is unproven in my industry or appli-
cati on. APC has proven capabilities:
Dynamic regulation of manufacturing processes
Operations management against optimal constraints
Reliable response to process upsets
Superior management of process transitions.
It has been widely applied in areas that had the financial means
to support groundbreaking technology investments (refining and
large-scale chemical/petrochemical sites). New applications have
built on this investment. A significant number of applications still
exist in specialty and less traditional manufacturing areas. Many of
these, due to the competitive strategies mentioned previously, are
unreported. Specialty applications within hydrocarbon processing
(i.e., secondary units, utilities and inventory management) are
reported in product-user societies, but less frequently publicly.
Knowledge users are generally more concerned wirb whether an
underlying value proposirion exists for a new application, rather
than whether the technology has the capability to capture it.
Myth 11: APC applications are difficult to main-
tain. Barring process design changes, raw material shifts and
notable fouling equipment, many APC applications run for
Pipeline & Terminal
Pump control & MCC
Sampler & Analyzer
Electrical Sub Slation
Buildings shipped with
electrical and mechanical
accessories Pre-lnstolled
* Instrumentation &
Process Controls
Select 88 atwww.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
57
SPECIALREPORT PROCESS AND PLANT OPTIMIZATION
extended periods (years) with little maintenance. This is gener-
ally not the case in the refining and petrochemical industries,
and given the benefits that these applications generate, neglect-
ing APC maintenance i.s a poor business strategy.
The most common changes to an APC application are limit and
cost fector adjustments based on changes in the operating strategy,
and model updates typically necessitated by changing feed qual-
ity, mechanical process change or significant change in operating
point. The required maintenance is not difficult or unnecessarily
time-consuming, rather, it is difficult to staff. APC engineers are
frequently leaders in their respective companies and often move on
to greater responsibility. APC applications should utilize commer-
cially available tools and established techniques whenever possible
to improve niaintainabiiity. One very successful and cost-effective
model tor support is to train an "expert process operator" with
budgeted contract expertise when required.
Myth 12:1 don't need APC until I complete my sup-
ply chain/production planning project. Most APC
projects will raise the understanding of the production capability
of processing units to a significantly higher and more accurate
level. Through APC, the true constraints of the process are
identified; production is much more repeatable and consistent;
impact of operating disturbances is mitigated; and, in general,
a dependable production model for each major processing unit
can be developed. APC and production planning/supply chain
HVIMXMKH
Now available from HYDROCARBON
PROCESSING
The Natural Gas Processing
Wall Chart
The Natural Gas
Processing Wall
Chart di.splays a
schematic of the
gas processing
industry from
wellhead to
end product. Includes projections for the industry
in 2003 from the 2003 HP! Market Data Book and
four representative processes (Sulfur recovery, Gas
Processing Plant. Measurement Refined Products, LNG
Liquefaction, LNG Import, Storage and Rcgasification
Terminal) in the style and format of the 2002 Gas
Processing Handbook.
It will be mailed rolled and is 37.5" wide by 26"
tail, printed on 70 lb. paper. Suitable for mounting
or framing. Single copies $39.95 plus appropriate
taxes and shipping and handling. Multiple copies
available at discount. Order through our website
vvww.HydrocarbonProcessing.com or call our reprint
department at 713-520-4426.
initiatives greatly complement each other. However, APC is the
foundational, frontline mechanism for implementing any strate-
gies that are dc\'e!oped and for ensuring resulting benefits.
Myth 13: APC benefits come primarily from
improved control. Improved control is the feature of MPC
that allows the process to be operated more reliably and with less
variation on critical variables. But the economic benefits of APC
stem from operating the process closer to the true (and most opti-
mal) operating constraints. Utilizing APC ro implement a business
strategy online, and properly adjusting the process variable limits
toward the true equipment constraints are the critical elements.
Myth 14: APC algorithm or product X cannot solve
my problem. Innovative, highly skilled control engineers can
make many things work. Many commercially available APC
technologies can solve a broad range of problems. The algorithm
is more a reflection of the technical and logistical approach
that must be taken to solve the problem, than an indicator of
potential project success. When difficult technical challenges
are present, the algorithm impacts the level of effort and cost
required to obtain the projected benefits Is key.
Myth 15: Process and control engineers are the
primary users of APC. All good control engineers know that
acceptance of the M*Q application by process operators is critical
to success. To achieve desired benefits, APC systems must inher-
endy change process operations and performance from previously
accepted paradigms. Process operators have responsibility for
monitoring the process (and the underlying performance of the
APC system) and frequendy have the determining vote for assess-
ing APC performance in the form of an "on/off switch."
Truth. APC applications continue to generate appreciable
economic benefits despite significant changes ongoing in the
chemical/petrochemical industries' business environment. These
benefits are achieved by long-term operation, not a step change
in performance following an APC project. Perhaps the greatest
myth is that these applications and the benefits they generate
are not critical to business success. A foundational business
understanding remains;
APC is not a commodity
The capabilities of the technology, skills of the implementer
and proposed methodology must be evaluated together
Risks of implementation are not unique to APC, but a
reflection of the business environment.
Understanding tbe success record of APC and its truths paints
an encouraging picture for tbe continued adoption of tbis tech-
nology as an industry best practice. HP
Wi l l i am M. Canney is a principal technologist with Aspen
Technology, He is responsible for APC technology development
and contributing to AspenTech's overall technical direction. He has
over 20 years of experience with APC and MPC technologies as a
practitioner, technology developer and business leader, Mr. Can-
ney also worked for FMC Corp,, Union Carbide, Praxair and DMCC. He is a chemical
engineering graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and a liaison to several
University and industry consortia, Mr, Canney has published numerous articles and
patents related to his APC work on several applications including performance moni-
tonng, refining, blending, cryogenic air separation, plastics, powders and drying. He
can be reached via e-mail at William.Canney@AspenTech.com.
58 JUNE 2005 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING