Full Papers

Optimization and Control of Polymerization Processes

By Guido Dnnebier*, Dennis van Hessem, Jitendra V. Kadam, Karsten-U. Klatt, and Martin Schlegel

1 Introduction
Polymers today are indispensable products used in all
parts of everyday life. The range of applications includes
standard applications such as textile fibers, CDs and packaging materials, and special ones in the automobile and electrical industries or optical components. A hundred million metric tons of polymers are produced every year throughout
the world in a broad spectrum of types and prices. While
quality demands on upmarket polymers have steadily increased in recent years, former specialized polymers are now
becoming mass-produced articles with much lower profit
margins, causing tremendous pressure to make production
more efficient and cost-effective. Constantly increasing market dynamics also demand flexibility in production planning
to accommodate changes in plant load, product types, and
quality. To operate polymerization processes economically,
process automation must enable strict compliance with the
required product characteristics coupled with fast responses
to market demands at minimum costs.
The inherent characteristics of polymerization processes
are a challenge to process management and optimization.
Process dynamics are nonlinear, highly coupled, and often
dominated by time delays. Polymers are macromolecules
with distributed composition and chain lengths (and hence,
molecular weights), and the processing properties of the final products essentially depend on the distribution of these
fundamental polymer characteristics. Real-time measurement of these characteristics is not feasible, however, so that
parameters such as viscosity and density are the only indirect
way of accessing them online.
In most polymerization processes, operational and economic requirements involve three main problems for process control and automation. Although not each of them is
relevant to all processes, they form an abstraction of the
predominant problems. The most frequent problem is quality control. Parameters with relevance to quality must be
kept at a specified value even in the presence of disturbances in order to ensure that the final product will follow

[*]

Dr. G. Dnnebier (guido.duennebier@bayertechnology.com), Dr. K.-U.

Klatt, Bayer Technology Services GmbH, PMT-AMS Advanced Process
Control, D-51368 Leverkusen; J. Kadam, M. Schlegel, Chair of Process
Systems Engineering, RWTH Aachen, D-52056 Aachen, Germany;
D. van Hessem, Systems and Control Group, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5

DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200407117

the specifications. Disturbances affecting quality control can

occur as the result of random external factors such as fluctuations in feed characteristics, or operational requirements
such as load or grade change. Grade change is the second
problem for process control. Many, albeit continuous, polymerization processes are used to manufacture more than
one product quality in the same production line. In most
cases, the frequent changes in quality cause a more or less
substantial quantity of off-spec polymers for both products,
which can be sold only at very low prices. A crucial lever for
improving economic efficiency is the reduction of this offspec product. The third problem is load change, when a
change in production output is generated either by production planning or by unscheduled technical difficulties. As
the polymer melt normally cannot be buffered temporarily
without significant deterioration in quality, a spontaneous
load change in the reactor itself is necessary. By optimizing
the mode of operation off-spec products often can be completely avoided.
There are many references in the literature dealing with
control and optimization of polymerization processes. An
overview can be found in [1] and [2], for further literature,
see also [3]. The most frequently described issue is the problem of quality control and in most cases a model predictive
controller in some form is proposed. The problem of state
and parameter estimation is mostly solved by combining it
with an extended Kalman filter. A great many of articles on
this subject have been published recently, however, almost
all of them have been written by a relatively small circle of
academic researchers. The small number of contributions
from industry is hardly surprising considering the high pressure of competition and the deployment of proprietary skill
and know-how associated with it [1]. In practice, there are
some restrictions that often cannot be recognized at a glance
and make direct application of the academic technologies
more difficult:
Nonlinear polymerization processes limit the use of linear
model predictive controllers.
The availability and reliability of online quality measurement is often inadequate.
The generation of the process model on which the controller is based can be a problem and may require a lot of time
and effort.
Nevertheless, there is a large number of industrial applications many of which have been published. Most of them,
 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

575

Full Paper

2 Industrial Polymerization Process

however, refer to the manufacture of polyolefins, where the

above problems either have been resolved or are less relevant (see, e.g., [46]).
As far as the two other problem categories are concerned,
there are approaches in the literature to solving the problem
of grade change, the problem of load change, however, is
not considered although, in principle, it could be solved by
the same approaches. Here, the optimum reference trajectory is usually determined offline by solving a dynamic optimization problem. The small number of known applications
permanently used in production indicates that there are still
some problems involved, for example:
Predefined reference trajectories often result in an explosion of possible combinations due to the large number of
transitional processes because all the conceivable variations need to be optimized.
The starting conditions for the transition are usually not
known precisely because they differ in reality from a steady-state condition. A state estimation can be helpful, but
it increases the complexity of the program.
If disturbances occur, they can influence both the optimality and the feasibility of the predefined trajectories.
The model used for optimization gives an imprecise picture
of reality: in particular, the effect of long-term changes (e.g.,
fouling or degradation) on the process cannot be determined in advance so that optimized reference trajectories
are not useful unless combined with a quality controller.
The changes suggested by the optimized trajectory are often even more abrupt than the conventional mode of operation and cannot always be implemented in the existing
basic controllers.
Most of these requirements and problems demand a greater degree of integration of process control and dynamic optimization for polymerization processes. An approach to process optimization based on a complex process model with
state estimation and model predictive control was developed
in the EU project INCOOP [7] and applied to the industrial
example process described in the following section.

The process considered is a continuous polymerization in

a continuous stirred tank reactor with evaporative cooling,
downstream monomer separation and recycling and polymer
processing (see Fig. 1). The reactor load has to be changed
in case of cleaning, maintenance, disturbance or recipe modification, as the polymer melt cannot be buffered. Product
changes also occur in this process, in the following load
change is considered by way of example.
The reaction is operated at medium rate with an operating
point stabilized by underlying temperature control. The stability constraints to be met by the underlying controller limit
the maximum transition rate.
The control variables for quality control are the viscosity
at the outlet of polymer processing and the polymer content
at the reactor outlet. These two variables must be maintained within a tight band even in the presence of disturbances.
The available manipulated variables are the recycle monomers, the quantity of fresh monomers, the quantity of catalyst and the reactor temperature.
Till now, quality has been controlled manually by online
measurement of the polymer content/conversion and laboratory sampling for viscosity. The availability and reliability of
the quality measurements is crucial for the quality control
system. For some polymerization processes, viscosity can be
estimated by other measurements (e.g., concentrations) with
the help of a model (e.g., with a neural network). For other
processes such as the one used as an example, this is not possible and therefore, online measurement of viscosity is indispensable for an efficient and accurate quality control. For
technical reasons, it is arranged downstream of the polymer
processing, which results in a pronounced time delay in regard to the polymerization reactor. In this implementation, a
possible failure of online measurement and its replacement
by laboratory values was taken into account by using a multirate Kalman filter.

MV 1: Recycle Monomers [kg/h]

FC

Buffer

Recycle

Tank

Cooling Water

LC

Monomer

MV 2: Reaktor Temperature [C]

Loop
Catalyst

TC
LC

MV 3: Feeds
[kg/h]

Polymer
Separation

Downstream
Processing

CV 1: Conversion [%]

CV 2: Viscosity

Figure 1. Process Scheme.

576

 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

http://www.cet-journal.de

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5

Full Paper
The accuracy of the reactor output flow measurement is
limited because in this particular application only a correlation via the output pump characteristics can be used. For
simulation studies the errors for all measurements were specified on the basis of process data.
The basis for optimization and control is a dynamic model of
the polymerization reaction previously developed for the reactor design. The reactor and buffer tank are modeled as continuous stirred tank reactors with mass and energy balances and
complex polymerization kinetics, whereas strongly simplified
models were used for the cooling system and monomer separation. The model is implemented in the gPROMS simulation
environment (Process Systems Enterprise Ltd.) and comprises
approximately 200 states and 2 500 algebraic variables. The essential uncertainty of the model is the effect of some species
accumulating via the recycle stream on the reaction.

3 Problem Formulation
In the following, a load change problem under process disturbances will be discussed as an example (see Fig. 2). The
process is in a steady-state condition at load A before the
load change begins. Switching a part of the polymer processing stage on or off forces the reactor to suddenly change to
load B. The reactor level now has to be adapted as fast as
possible to adjust the residence time by switching to the appropriate feed flow rates. Load reduction is a particular challenge because the reactor has to be partially emptied at the
same time as the output is reduced. In this case, the surplus
monomers can be temporarily stored in the buffer tank although its capacity is limited.
If possible, the product specifications for viscosity should
be maintained throughout the transition process, conversion
can vary within a larger range during load change. The product specifications allow fluctuation of the quality parameters
by 2 % at steady state. The reactor level control loop is deactivated for the duration of the transition process although
the stabilizing temperature control remains active the whole

MV 1: Recycle Monomers [kg/h]

FC

time. The process should be in steady-state condition at the

end of the transition.
The scenario consists of a load change from 50 % to 100 %
and reverse. The quantities of fresh and recycled monomers
and catalyst metering are the degrees of freedom for optimization. The reactor temperature set point, for which no large
changes are allowed, remains constant. The selected degrees
of freedom for the underlying quality controller are the recycled monomer quantity and the reactor temperature set
point. The quantity of catalyst is kept constant in this case
due to model uncertainties and mixing effects inside the reactor. The mass flows at all the reactor inlets and at the outlet, the levels inside the reactor and the buffer tank, reactor
temperature, rate and product viscosity, concentrations at
the reactor outlet and recycled monomer are measured. Important bounds for optimization and control are the quantity
of polymer produced, i.e., the mass flow at the reactor outlet,
buffer tank volume, rate of change for the reactor temperature set point, solvent concentration and the quality variables conversion and viscosity.
Disturbances in the context of the model based control
are the uncertainties described above and the accumulation
of some species in the recycled monomers, which can only
be purged discontinuously.

4 Solution Approach
The load problem described above can be formulated and
resolved as an optimization based control problem. Optimization based process control aims not only to achieve standard closed-loop objectives such as disturbance rejection,
but also uses the additional degrees of freedom in the process
for optimizing economically. A possible approach to solving
the problem is the integration of dynamic (real-time) optimization and model predictive control as pursued in the
INCOOP project [7].
A diagram of this concept is shown in Fig. 3. Optimization, control and estimation modules can be recognized. In

Trajectory
Buffer

Recycle

Tank

Cooling Water

LC

Monomer

MV 2: Reaktor Temperature [C]

Loop
Catalyst

LC

MV 3: Feeds
[kg/h]

TC

Separation

Downstream
Processing

CV 1: Conversion [%]

Fout

f(h)

Polymer

CV 2: Viscosity

Figure 2. Load change szenario.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5

http://www.cet-journal.de

 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

577

Full Paper
the following, the functionality of this architecture is briefly
outlined and some details of the individual modules are described. For further details, see [3, 7].
market and
environmental
conditions
state and disturbance
estimates (slow)

Estimation

Time Scale
Separation

state and disturbance

estimates (fast)

Dynamic
Real Time
Optimisation
optimal reference
trajectories
Model
Predictive
Control
control setpoints

Plant Simulator
measurements

Plant (including base control)

Figure 3. Integration of dynamic realtime optimization and model predictive

control.

The basic idea consists in operating the process along optimized trajectories, ensuring that the bounds described in
section 3 are nominally met and that, additionally, a quality
criterion such as minimization of load change duration is optimized. This is a two-level approach [7]. The upper level
runs a dynamic (reference) trajectory optimization. In mathematical terms, this is the (repeated) solution of a dynamic
optimization problem (or optimal control problem) [8]. The
optimization software used was DyOS [9]. It works according to the so-called sequential method, in which the control
profiles for optimization are discretized and a nonlinear optimization problem (NLP) is solved with underlying repeated simulations of the rigorous process model already
mentioned. The optimization allows for the limitations listed
above and uses an objective function representing a combination of three criteria to be minimized: load change duration itself as well as the deviations of viscosity from the set
point and of the process from steady state, each at the end
of load change.
The result of the optimization is an optimal reference trajectory both for the manipulated variables (i.e., mass flows
of fresh and recycled monomer and catalyst) and the relevant process variables (reactor volume, viscosity, conversion
and reactor temperature). These are now passed to the MPC
on the lower level, which ensures that the system remains
within to the limitations even under the influence of plantmodel mismatch and disturbances. In the case under study,
the MPC uses linear time variant process models to achieve
sufficiently fast computing times while still taking account of
process nonlinearity. The linear process models are generated by linearizing the rigorous nonlinear process model
around the optimized trajectories. To compensate for disturbances, the MPC is implemented such that it computes the
deviations from the reference trajectories obtained from
the optimizer, rather than new trajectories. The solution of
578

a quadratic optimization problem (QP) and the linearization steps required to compute an MPC step were done in
MATLAB [10], while gPROMS was used for the prediction
step. Finally, the resulting controller set points are transmitted to the regulatory controller on the process level (or
to a simulation model of the process).
An essential aspect of this two-level approach is that it
uses two different time scales at the two levels. Whereas the
optimization level uses a long prediction horizon so that the
effect of adjustments on process conditions can be taken into
account at the end of the load change, the MPC level uses a
much shorter prediction horizon in order to guarantee sufficiently short calculation intervals. The computing time of
the MPC is essentially determined by the prediction with the
rigorous process model. As the upper level optimization
needs to be done only when required and, in the absence
of significant external disturbances, only once before load
change begins, a long prediction horizon, which influences
computing time also here, is possible.
Both the MPC and the optimizer need information about
the current state of process and disturbances to obtain the
correct initial state for the simulations used in the control
and optimization algorithm, and to take account of the disturbances for the control problem. In this study, a multirate
extended Kalman filter [11, 12] is used for simultaneous state
and parameter estimation. Beside the measurement noise,
an additional offset of max. 5 % on flow measurement at the
reactor outlet and a delay of 6 scanning intervals in viscosity
measurement have to be taken into account. The calculations were also done in MATLAB by using gPROMS simulations for prediction.
The overall simulation result was obtained by connecting
the individual heterogeneous software modules with the help
of INCA OPC server technology [13].

5 Simulation Results
The load change scenario presented in this article assumes
a known starting condition and requires no repeated (re-)optimization of the reference trajectories. For this reason, one
optimization calculation at the beginning of the transition
phase is sufficient. Simulation studies were then conducted
for the overall scenario, taking account of the listed disturbances. The results are presented in the following.
Let us first consider the graphs of the manipulated variables shown in Fig. 4. The solid lines represent the reference
graphs as calculated by the optimizer. The value and time
axes each are scaled to a reference value. The load change
from 50 % to 100 % and reverse shows up on the monomer
feed graph, which correlates in steady state operation with
the load of the process. The curve in the transition range between the two end states and the manipulated variables recycle rate and catalyst feed are the result of the optimization calculation and guarantee the minimum transition time
in compliance with all the bounds. This can be seen from the

 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

http://www.cet-journal.de

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5

Full Paper
control variables shown in Fig. 5. The bounds for the quality
variables conversion and viscosity are also illustrated.
Conversion violates the bounds during transition, which is allowed, but is safely within it at the respective operating points.
Viscosity is required to be on-specification throughout the
process, a goal that has been well reached here. In addition,
the transition time as compared to the conventional manual
operation of the process has been drastically reduced.

MV 1: Feed

Process performance in the simulation is of particular interest when the disturbances are introduced into the simulation. The broken lines in Figs. 4 and 5 illustrate the results of
this online simulation, and the measured values for the controlled variables are indicated by dots. The simulation results
show that the process can be operated robustly along the
reference curves even in the presence of significant disturbances (note the strong instrument noise, especially with viscosity). Even then, it is well within the
quality limits.

MV 2: Temperature setpoint

4
Reference
On-line

Reference
On-line

1.01

6 Summary and Conclusions

value/valueref

value/valueref

1.005

0
0

2
3
time/timeref

1
0

2
3
time/timeref

MV 3: Recycle

MV 2: Catalyst

8
Reference
On-line

Reference

value/valueref

value/valueref

1
0
0

2
3
time/timeref

0
0

2
3
time/timeref

Figure 4. Simulation results: manipulated variables.

CV 1: Reactor Volume

CV 2: Viscosity

Reference
Measurement
On-line

1.02

Reference
Measurement
On-line

1.01
value/valueref

value/valueref

1.8
1.6
1.4

0.99

1.2
0.98
1
0

2
3
time/timeref

CV 3: Conversion

2
3
time/timeref

CV 4: Reactor Temperature

1.15

1.015
Reference
Measurement
On-line

Reference
Measurement
On-line

1.01
value/valueref

1.1
value/valueref

1.05

1.005

0.95
0.9
0

2
3
time/timeref

0.995
0

Figure 5. Simulation results: controlled variables.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5

http://www.cet-journal.de

2
3
time/timeref

This article describes the application of

a combined approach for process control
and optimization to a load change scenario in an industrial polymerization process.
This approach combines nonlinear, dynamic trajectory optimization with linear,
time variant model predictive control and
an extended Kalman filter. Software implementation was based on the INCA
OPC server of IPCOS technology.
The scenario considered is a spontaneous load change from 50 % to 100 %
load and reverse with high quality demands, operational limitations and disturbances. The chosen approach allows
a smooth transition in compliance with
product specifications, which is a significant improvement over the present practice of manual operation. The model and
the optimized trajectories were validated
at the production plant.
The use of preoptimized trajectories
combined with quality control is certainly
suboptimal from the theoretical point of
view. However, a reliable real-time solution to the optimization problem is not
yet possible in a nonlinear model predictive controller. Current research work is
focusing on automated trajectory updating depending on the current process status and the deviation from the nominal
status in the model.
The most important result of this work
is that the economic potential and feasibility of combined process control and
dynamic optimization could be illustrated
by an industrial polymerization process.
Full integration of process control and
dynamic online optimization and practical implementation can now be envisaged
in the near future.

 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

579

Full Paper

Acknowledgements
This study was sponsored by the European Commission as
part of the project Integrated Process Unit Control and
Plant Wide Optimization (INCOOP) (G1RD-CT-1999
00146). The authors express their appreciation to Ton Backx,
technical project manager, for his commitment and enthusiasm contributing significantly to the success of the project.
The conceptual and technical discussions with Wolfgang
Marquardt and Okko Bosgra and the support provided by
Mario Balenovic, Andrei Tiagounov, Jobert Ludlage and
other INCOOP team members in implementing the software are also gratefully acknowledged.

[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]

Received: November 30, 2004 [CET 7117]

This paper was also published in German in Chem. Ing. Tech. 2004, 76 (6), 703.
DOI: 10.1002/cite.200403370

References
[1]
[2]

G. Dnnebier et al., J. Proc. Control 2003.

R. Dittmar, G. D. Martin, atp 2001, 43, 2.
H. Seki et al., Control. Eng. Pract. 2001, 9, 819.
C. Kiparissides, G. Verros, J. F. McGregor, Macromol. Chem. Phys. 1993,
33, 437.
J. V. Kadam et al., in: Proc. FOCAPO (Eds: I. E. Grossmann, C.-M.
McDonald), Coral Springs, Florida, 2003, 593.
D. Kraft, Comput. Math. Prog. 1985, 15, 261.
DyOS, User Manual, Release 2.1, Lehrstuhl fr Prozesstechnik, RWTH
Aachen, Germany, 2002.
MathWorks, Using MATLAB, Version 6, The MathWorks, Inc., Natick,
USA, 2000.
J. H. Lee, N. L. Ricker, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1994, 33, 1530.
V. Prasad, M. Schley, L. P. Russo, B. W. Bequette, J. Process Control
2002, 12, 353.
IPCOS Technology, IPCOS Integrated Solution Platform, User Manual,
IPCOS Technology b.v., Boxtel, The Netherlands, 2001.
gPROMS User Guide, Release 2.1.1, Process Systems Enterprise Ltd.,
London 2002.

J. P. Congalidis, J. R. Richards, Polym. React. Eng. 1988, 6, 71.

M. Embirucu, E. L. Lima, J. C. Pinto, Polym. Eng. Sci. 1996, 36, 433.

______________________

580

 2005 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

http://www.cet-journal.de

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, No. 5