Tablet Press Instrumentation

MARCEL DEKKER, INC.
270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Tablet Press Instrumentation

Michael Levin
Metropolitan Computing Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, U.S.A.
INTRODUCTION This article is designed to facilitate the understanding of the general principles of tablet press instrumentation and the benets thereof by the formulators, process engineers, validation specialists, and quality assurance personnel, as well as production oor supervisors who would like to understand the basic standards and techniques of getting information about their tableting process.
HISTORY OF TABLET PRESS INSTRUMENTATION In 1952 1954 Higuchi and his group[1] have instrumented upper and lower compression, ejection, and punch displacement on an eccentric tablet press, and pioneered the modern study of compaction process. This work was followed by Nelson[2,3] who was the member of the original group. In 1966, a U.S. patent was granted to Knoechel and coworkers[4] for force measurement on a tablet press. This patent was followed by two seminal articles in Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences on the practical applications of instrumented rotary tablet machines.[5,6] A number of other patents related to press instrumentation and control followed from 1973 on ward.[7 15] Despite the availability of published designs for instrumenting rotary presses, much of the early work on compaction properties of materials was done on instrumented single punch eccentric presses primarily, due to the relative ease of sensor installation, as well as availability of punch displacement measurement.[16 18] In mid-1980s, custom-made press monitoring systems were described,[19,20] and the rst commercial instrumentation packages became available, including both the systems for product development and press control. The rst personal computer-based tablet press monitor was sold in 1987, and the rst Microsoft Windows-based press instrumentation package in 1995. A new era of compaction research has begun with the introduction of an instrumented compaction simulator[21]
Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical Technology DOI: 10.1081/E-EPT 120012030 Copyright q 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved.
in 1976, while a compaction simulator patent was issued as recently as 1996.[22] A new generation of compaction simulators was born when a mechanical press replicator was patented in the year 2000.[23] A good expose of the early stages of press instrumentation and resulting research is presented in review articles by Schwartz,[24] Marshall,[25] and Jones.[26] A comprehensive review can be found in a relatively recent paper by Celik and Ruegger.[27] For other historical information on the press instrumentation, the reader is encouraged to peruse Ridgeway Watts[28] volume. There have been a number of papers published on various disparate instrumentation topics, and in a recent volume by Munos-Ruiz and Vromans,[29] there are two good articles on the subjectbut, unfortunately, they deal with marginal issues of single station press and instrumented punch only.
DATA ACQUISITION PRINCIPLES: FROM TRANSDUCERS TO COMPUTERS To monitor and control a tablet press, certain sensors must be installed at specic locations on the machine. These sensors are called transducers. In general, a transducer is a device that converts energy from one form to another (e.g., force to voltage). Tablet press transducers typically measure applied force, turret speed, or punch position. Because the signals coming from such transducers are normally in millivolts, they need to be amplied and then converted to digital form in order to be processed by a data acquisition system. Piezoelectric Gages Historically, high impedance piezoelectric transducers that employ quartz crystals were used in early stages of press instrumentation. When subject to stress, the crystal accumulates electrostatic charge that is directly proportional to the applied force. Both low and (more modern) high impedance piezoelectric gages have high-frequency response, but may exhibit signal drifting due to charge
1
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016

leakage (approximately 0.04% decay per second can be seen in modern piezoelectric transducers). Nowadays, the preferred way of instrumenting tablet presses is with strain gages. Strain Gages Strain gages are foil, wire, or semiconductor devices that convert pressure or force into electrical voltage. When a stress is applied to a thin wire, it becomes longer and thinner. Both factors contribute to increased electrical resistance. If an electrical current is sent through this wire, it will be affected by the changes in the resistance of the conduit. This principle is used in strain gage-based transducers. Foil gages, known for robust application range, useful nominal resistance, and reliable sensitivity control, are most commonly used for instrumentation of compression, precompression, and ejection forces. Semiconductor-based strain gages are inherently more sensitive but suffer from high electrical noise and temperature sensitivity. Such gages are not commonly used in tablet press instrumentation except for measurement of die-wall pressure and take-off forces. Wheatstone Bridge
balanced, a small perturbation in the resistance of any leg of the bridge results in a nonzero signal output. The output of the Wheatstone bridge is normally expressed in millivolts per volt of excitation per unit of applied force. For example, sensitivity of 0.2 mV/V/kN means that applying, say, 10 kN force and 10 V excitation will produce 20 mV output. To utilize such output, it usually needs to be amplied several hundred times to reach units of volts. Another important function of the bridge is balancing of temperature effects. Although individual strain gages are sensitive to temperature uctuations, Wheatstone bridge arrangement provides for temperature sensitivity compensation, so that the resulting transducer is no longer changing its output to any signicant degree when it heats up. Because the output of these bridges is in the range of millivolts, the cables utilized to carry the signal are normally shielded with a braided or foil-lined sheath around individual wires. The shield, as a rule, is connected to the amplier, but never touches the actual instrumented equipment (i.e., tablet press). If this rule is violated, a ground loop may generate electrical noise and present a dangerous electrical shock hazard. Gage Factor
Wheatstone bridge (Fig. 1) is a special arrangement of strain gages that is used to ensure signal balancing. The full bridge is composed of two pairs of resistors in a circle, with two parallel branches used for input and two for signal output. By applying the so-called excitation voltage (typically, 10 V DC) to the bridge input and changing the resistance of different legs of the bridge by adding special resistors, we can make sure that there is a zero output voltage when no load is applied to the transducer. This is called zero balance. Once the bridge is
The gage factor is a specic characteristic of a strain gage. It is calculated as the change in resistance relative to unit strain that has caused this change. Strain gages that are commonly used for tablet press instrumentation are made from copper nickel alloy and have a gage factor of about 2. In a typical bending beam application (such as compression roll transducer), one side of the beam experiences tension while the other side undergoes compression. By mounting two gages on each side, the sensitivity of the transducer can be doubled. Strain gages have to be bonded to areas of machine parts that are most sensitive to applied force. Such areas can be identied with the use of polarized light technique that points out the stress distribution. Manufacturing a Force Transducer Usually, instrumentation designs are proprietary and specic detail drawings are held in ducial capacity. Each force transducer is custom designed for a particular machine part. Overall specications are taken from the actual party and/or manufacturer approved drawings. Duplicate steel members, such as pins and cams, are normally made from A2 tool steel in a fully annealed
Fig. 1 A typical Wheatstone bridge arrangement of strain gages.

(softened) state. Original machine parts are rst annealed, if required. The member is then machined, hardened to Rockwell 60 64, tested, and nally, ground to specied dimensions. It is highly advantageous to determine stress distribution using polarized light beams identifying the areas of maximum strain yet avoiding areas of uneven strain. A typical procedure of transducer manufacturing in a professional gaging lab might be as follows. Foil type strain gages are bonded to the steel member utilizing a high-performance 100% solid epoxy system adhesive under controlled heating rate conditions. After intrabridge wiring is completed using solid conductor wiring (to prevent electrical noise), multistrand wire cabling with a combination of foil and braided insulation is connected to the bridge. Wire anchoring is achieved utilizing epoxy adhesive and protected with a combination of latex-based adhesives and/or epoxy resins. Lead wire cabling is protected by Teon outer shield, as well as inner braided wire shield. The Teon to steel joint is sealed with epoxy but should not be subject to stresses that would cause the cable to kink or yield in such a way as to expose the inner braided wire shield. Protective coatings are then applied and nal postcure heating is performed for at least 2 hr at a temperature approximately 508C above the transducer normal operating temperature (approximately 175 or 105 8C). A silicon-based adhesive, such as RTV, is used to ll large cavities while maintaining a low modulus of elasticity, preventing undue inuence upon the actual strain measurement. The coating is resilient to moderate mechanical abrasion, as well as most solvents, oils, cleaners, etc. It is not intended for protection against penetrating sharp objects. A high-quality connector is then attached to the cable. The next step is to perform offset zeroing with xed, 1% precision, low-temperature coefcient resistors, followed by NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology) traceable calibration. It is worth noting that, in general, the duplicate members are not made of corrosion-resistant steel, because high tensile strength and ability to be easily machined are required. Prior to storage, the surface should be treated like any high-grade tablet press punch steel will be treated; a thin coating of oil should be used after wiping with alcohol. Load Cells In some cases, where appropriate, a load cell can be used in place of bonded strain gages. A load cell is a strain gage bridge in an enclosure forming a complete transducer device.
Like any properly made transducer, it produces an output signal proportional to the applied load. Unlike custom-made transducers that require application of strain gages directly to press parts, load cells are self-contained and can be placed on a press in specially machined cavities to be easily replaced or serviced. As a drawback, load cells generally are less sensitive or less suited to measure the absolute force than custom-made strain gage transducers. Load cells can be used on punch holders in a single station press. Another example of load cell use is a die assembly for calibration of existing traducers on a press. Linear Variable Differential Transformer Linear variable differential transformer (LVDT, Fig. 2) is a device that produces voltage proportional to the position of a core rod inside a cylinder body. It measures displacement or a position of an object relative to some predened zero location. On tablet presses, LVDTs are used to measure punch displacement and in-die thickness. They generally have very high precision and accuracy, but there are numerous practical concerns regarding improper mounting or maintenance of such transducers on tablet presses. Proximity Switch Proximity switch (Fig. 3) is a noncontact electromagnetic pickup device that senses the presence of metal. On tablet presses, it is widely used to detect the beginning of a turret
Fig. 2 Linear variable differential transformer (LVDT).

Instrumentation Terms: Denitions Several important terms may be now dened with respect to transducers and signal conditioning:
.
Fig. 3 Proximity switch.

.
revolution, to identify stations and to facilitate peak detection in tablet force control applications.
Instrumentation Amplier and Signal Conditioning Signal conditioning involves primarily an amplier that provides the excitation voltage, as well as gain (a factor used in converting millivolt output of the strain gage bridge to the volt-based range of the input of the data acquisition device). Instrumentation amplier is different from other types of ampliers in that the signal from each side of the transducer bridge is amplied separately and then the difference between the two amplied signals is, in turn, amplied. As a result, noise from both sides of the sensors is reduced. Some instrumentation ampliers also offer lter functionality. A lter circuit combines resistors and capacitors that act to block the undesirable frequencies. It is a fact, however, that a good transducer should provide a clean signal. Use of analog or digital lters may cause the loss of some important portions of the signal that one is attempting to measure. Frequency lters may cause the measured compression force peak, for example, to be skewed toward the trailing edge of the peak and can yield a lower than actual peak force. Because lters distort the signal, they must be avoided unless absolutely necessary. In many cases, better electronics may make lter use obsolete. For example, the so-called antialiasing lter that is used to condition a high-frequency signal for a slow sampling rate is generally not required for tablet press applications if modern fast speed data acquisition devices are used for signal processing. In addition to amplication, excitation, and ltering, signal-conditioning devices may provide isolation, voltage division, surge protection, and current-to-voltage conversion.
.
Full Scale (FS): The total interval over which a transducer is intended to operate. Also, it can dene the output from transducer when the maximum load is applied. Excitation: The voltage applied to the input terminals of a strain gage bridge. Accuracy: The closeness with which a measurement approaches the true value of a variable being measured. It denes the error of reading. Good tablet press transducers have at least 1% accuracy (with this level of accuracy, for example, a compression force transducer with 50 kN FS will produce at most an error of 500 N). Precision: Reproducibility of a measurement, i.e., how much successive readings of the same xed value of a variable differ from one another. If a person is shooting darts, for example, the accuracy is determined by how close to the bulls eye the darts have landed, while the precision will be indicated by how close the darts are to each other. Resolution: The smallest change in measured value that the instrument can detect. Dynamic range of a transducer: The difference between the maximal FS level and the lowest detectable signal. Measured in decibels (dB), it indicates the ratio of signal maximum to minimum levels: dB 10 log10 Smax =Smin Some press sensors may have a rather narrow dynamic range not necessarily correlated with accuracy. For example, a very accurate compression roll pin designed to measure 50 kN force may not detect 5 kN signal. Calibration: Comparison of transducer outputs at standard test loads to output of a known standard at the same load levels. A line representing the best t to data is called a calibration graph. Calibration factor: A load value in engineering units that a transducer will indicate for each volt of output, after amplier gain and balance. Calibration factor is usually expressed in relation to FS. Shunt calibration: A procedure of transducer testing when a resistor with a known value is connected to one leg of the bridge. The output should correspond to the voltage specied in the calibration certicate. If it does not, something is wrong and the transducer needs to be inspected for possible damage or recalibrated.


.
Sensitivity: The ratio of a change in measurement value to a change in measured variable. For example, if a person ate a 1 lb steak and the bathroom scale shows 2 lb increase in the body weight, then the scale can be called as insensitive (ratio is far from unity). Traceability: The step-by-step transfer process by which the transducer calibration can be related to primary standards. During any calibration process, transducer is compared to a known standard. National or international institutions usually prescribe the standards. In the United States, such governing body is the NIST. Measurement errors: Any discrepancies between the measured values and the reported results over the entire FS. Such errors include, but are not limited to:
.
Nonlinearity: The maximum deviation of the calibration points from a regression line (best t to the data), expressed as a percentage of the rated FS output and measured on increasing load only. Repeatability: The maximum difference between transducer output readings for repeated applied loads under identical loading and environmental conditions. It indicates the ability of an instrument to give identical results in successive readings. Hysteresis: The maximum difference between transducer output readings for the same applied load. One reading is obtained by increasing the load from zero and the other reading is obtained by decreasing the load from the rated FS load. Measurements should be taken as rapidly as possible to minimize creep. Return to zero: The difference in two readings: one, at no load, and the second one, after the FS load was applied and removed.
off). A 12-bit system provides a resolution of one part in 212 4096; or approximately 0.025% of FS. Likewise, 16 bits correspond to one part in 216 65; 536; or approximately 0.0015% of FS (for tablet press applications, such resolution is usually excessive). Thus, resolution of ADC board limits not only the dynamic range but also the overall system accuracy. Alternatively, a higher resolution may be required to retain a certain level of accuracy within a given dynamic range. For example, a 0.5% accurate transducer with 80 dB dynamic range requires at least 12-bit ADC resolution. Amplifying a low-level signal by 10 or 100 times increases the effective resolution by more than 3 and 6 bits, respectively. On the other hand, increasing an ADC resolution cannot benet the overall system accuracy if other components, such as amplier or transducer, have a lower resolution. When an input signal change is smaller than the systems minimum resolution, then that event will go undetected. For example, for an FS of 10 V (corresponding to, say, a compression transducer output of 50 kN), using a 12-bit ADC, any signal that does not exceed 2.44 mV (12.2 N) will not be seen by the system. The ADC boards also differ by the effective sampling rate range. Sampling rate speed is measured in Hertz (times per second). The signals coming from a tablet press have a frequency of not more that 100 Hz (compression events per second). To avoid aliasing (losing resolution of the incoming signal due to slow sampling rate), the sampling rate should be at least twice the highest frequency of the signal. Most ADC boards used for data collection in tableting applications have a sampling rate of 5 20 times larger than signal frequency. That is why antialiasing lters are not required. Computers and Data Acquisition Software
A good transducer is one with the combined (or maximum) error of less than 1% of the FS. Analog-to-Digital Converters In order to convey analog output (in volts) from a transducer to a computer, it has to be converted into a sequence of binary digital numbers. Modern analog-todigital converter (ADC) boards are sophisticated highspeed electronic devices that are classied by the input resolution, as well as the range of input voltages and sampling rates. Resolution of an ADC board is measured in bits. Bit (abbreviation for binary unit) is a unit of information equal to one binary decision (such as yes or no, on or
Overall accuracy of a data acquisition system is determined by the worst-case error of all its components. One should be aware of the fact that most system errors come neither from transducers (0.5% 1% accuracy) nor from A/D converters (0.025% accuracy) but from the software analyzing the data (round-off errors, improper sampling rate, or algorithms). The speed and capacity of a data acquisition system depend on the computers processor and hard drive specications. The real-time data from transducers is streamlined to both the screen (for monitoring) and the disk (for replay and analysis). Generally speaking, realtime processing means reporting any change in the phenomena under study as it happens. Interestingly, but

a high-speed data collection from a tablet press and a bookkeeping home nance program used on a monthly basis to balance the checkbook can both be related to as real-time software. The difference is in the time frames. For a tablet press, we are collecting data that need to be sampled and processed in milliseconds (a typical compression event may take 25 msec), while for home bookkeeping once a month will do. Most vendors supplying transducers, signal conditioning, and computer hardware adhere to practical standards, e.g., there are some accepted norms for strain gage factors, combined errors, sensitivity, ADC resolution, and sampling rate. The difference between vendors is apparent when we compare software because there are no universally established standards of user interface. Yet the hardware is transparent (i.e., invisible) to the end userday in and day out the user is facing the screen, keyboard, and mouse. The ease of software use, bug-free analysis of signals coming from transducers, reliability of statistical computations, quality of graphs and reports, and validatability of the systemall of the above contribute to the quality of the data acquisition software. Proper validation tests of a data acquisition system should include calculation of an overall system error when the input is known and controlled (e.g., an NIST traceable signal generator providing a sinusoidal signal with a known amplitude and frequency, to simulate compression events on a press). Comparing the output (for example, peak heights as reported by the software) to the known input, the overall system error can be reliably established.
The R&D grade instrumentation, in contrast, requires placing the strain gages as close to the punch tips as possible in a vertical alignment with the direction of force application.[30] In practice, it means placing the gages in a compression roll pin, so that the resulting measurement would reect the absolute force. Thus, we can differentiate between the force on the upper and lower punch, and moreover, we can compare readings of the compression force from different tablet presses. Compression Force Measurement On a typical R&D grade compression transducer, a compression roll pin is machined with incisions made for placing strain gages (Fig. 4). The actual form of these cavities constitutes the very art of the transducer design that is usually proprietary and is based on the know-how of instrumentation vendor. It hast to be noted that there could be an upper or lower instrumented compression roll pin. The resulting measurement of a compression force is highly correlated with a variety of tablet properties. As compression increases, so does tablet hardness and weight (at constant thickness and true density), along with a force required to eject a tablet. Many variables affect the force of compression: press settings, press speed, punch length variation, punch wear, and damage, formulation and excipient properties. Precompression Force Measurement Similar to instrumented compression pin, there is a way to instrument an upper or lower instrumented precompression roll pin. Precompression, if it exists on a press, is used for de-aerating and initial tamping of the powder mass in the die and usually helps to achieve the desired hardness without capping or lamination.[30,31] The force
TABLET PRESS INSTRUMENTATION FOR PRODUCT AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT R&D Grade Instrumentation In a production environment, typical tablet weight control mechanism is driven by signals that are coming from a compression force transducer. Strain gages may be installed on a column connecting the upper and lower compression wheel assemblies. This transducer measures what is generally known as main compression, i.e., a diluted average of the forces acting on the upper and lower punches. Alternatively, a load cell may be positioned in some convenient location to register a transmitted compression force. It is measured away from the force application axis, and some force is lost in the transmission. The resulting measurement may be adequate for tablet weight control, but, even if properly calibrated, it does not represent the absolute value of the compression force.
Fig. 4 Compression force transducer.

of precompression is normally a fraction of the compression force. Ejection Force Measurement There are many ways to instrument an ejection cam. A preferred arrangement of strain gages (the so-called shear force design) does not require any discontinuities in the cam surface, and, most importantly, it provides for a very good linearity of the resulting signal (Fig. 5). Larger ejection forces may lead to an increased wear on tooling and eject cam surface. Ejection force may also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of lubrication (of both the press and the product) and punch sticking. Sensitivity and linearity of an ejection transducer are design dependent: shear force designs are always preferable over split cam or cantilevered beam designs. Take-Off Force Measurement Take-off force is monitored by mounting a strain gage to a cantilever beam on a press feed frame (in front of the takeoff blade, Fig. 6). It is done to measure adhesion of tablets to lower punch face. Such adhesion is indicative of underlubricated granulation, poor tooling face design, diewall binding, and tablet capping.[32,33] Speed Measurement and Station ID Determination Station identication and press speed are usually obtained by means of a revolution counter (proximity switch). It is installed on the press in order to mark the beginning of a turret revolution and thus enable station identication and speed calculations by system software. In addition, a linear arrangement of proximity switches can mark the beginning and end of a compression event
Fig. 6
Instrumented take-off bar.
(information that is vital for tablet weight controllers) and also indicate missing punches. Other points of instrumentation on a tablet press are as follows:
.
Fig. 5
Instrumented ejection cam.
A rotary press pull-up cam can be instrumented to measure the upper punch pull-up force (the force required to pull up the upper punch from the die). Likewise, the lower punch pull-down force is measured on a bolt holding the pull-down cam.[34] It is useful in determining the smoothness of press operation (extent of lubrication, cleanliness of the machine, and long batch fatigue buildup). Punch displacement measurements are easily done on a single station press by attaching LVDT to the punch. On a rotary press, such measurements can be done by means of slip ring, telemetry, or instrumented punch. Punch displacement proles may be used in conjunction with compression force to estimate work of compression and work of expansion (measure of elasticity). Because capping tendency increases with the punch penetration depth, it may be desirable to monitor actual punch movement into the die. The shape of a force displacement curve is an indication of the relative elasticity or plasticity of the material; whereas plastic deformation is desirable for stronger tablets, excess plasticity usually results in tablets that tend to cap and laminate.[35 37] Radial and axial die-wall force measurements also provide an insight into the compaction mechanism of the material and may indicate a die-wall binding (sticking) that is, in effect, a negative pull on lower punch. The radial die-wall pressure due to friction is material-specic and is more evenly distributed inside the die with an addition of a lubricant.[38 44] Instrumentation of the die presents a technological challenge because pressure is distributed nonlinearly

with respect to tablet position inside the die and depends on tablet thickness.[45,46] In-die temperature can be monitored for heat-sensitive formulation, such as ibuprofen.[47,48]
Instrumented Punch Several vendors offer instrumented punch, i.e., a punch that has strain gages and other instrumentation built-in. The data are then accumulated or transmitted via telemetry to a stationary computer. Such devices are versatile enough to report compression forces and either punch displacement or acceleration, and, at least in theory, they can be easily moved from press to press.[49,50] However, one should keep in mind that each instrumented punch is limited to one size and shape of the tooling, and is limited to one station, compared to roll pin instrumentation that reports data for all stations and any tooling. In addition, instrumented punches are either rather cumbersome to install, or else they report a useless measurement of punch acceleration instead of punch displacement. Attempts to calculate displacement from acceleration so far could not be validated. Single Punch Press for R&D Single punch eccentric presses are often used in early stages of formulation development because they do not require a large amount of powder. Another benet is that they allow relatively inexpensive measurements of die forces and punch displacement (there is no rotation of die table and therefore no need to use expensive telemetry methods). This is the primary reason why so much basic research and product development were done on eccentric machines.[51] Negative considerations are that a special tooling is required (usually, F tooling), and also that speed of compaction is too slow compared to rotary presses. As it will be seen later, the speed is a crucial factor in tableting process and therefore the results obtained on single punch presses do not directly correlate with tablets made on rotary machines. Benets of Press Instrumentation Among many benets of press instrumentation, formulation ngerprinting is perhaps the most obvious. Compressibility and ejection proles, as well as dissolution and disintegration curves related to compression force, are unique for each formulation and can be used as a batch record. For process optimization, one can include compression or precompression force and speed factors in
experimental design. Compactibility and ejection proles can be used for excipient and lubricant evaluation. Other useful product development and optimization tools include response surface, Heckel, and force thickness plots. Scientically reliable process scale-up cannot be achieved without instrumentation data providing scale-up parameters such as dwell time, density, and energy of a tablet. In a pilot plant and on the production oor, proper instrumentation can be used for press troubleshooting, to warn about tooling irregularities, worn-out cams, sticking punches, underlubricated dies, and so on. Finally, instrumentation is widely used for tablet weight control. Instrumentation for Formulation Development Much of the current body of knowledge about compaction properties of pharmaceutical materials came from instrumented tablet presses.[52 56] Many tablet properties, such as tensile strength (hardness) and porosity can be predicted from force proles.[57 59] Work of compaction (a scale-up parameter) can be obtained with proper instrumentation.[60,61] Information about the plasticity of materials can be derived from force time curves.[62 64] The phenomenon studied with the help of instrumentation is the so-called lag time (the time difference between peak of compression and maximum punch penetration). The extent of this lag is indicative of compaction mechanisms of the powder being compressed.[65,66] Typical waveform Let us have a look at the actual waveforms that one may obtain from an instrumented tablet press (Fig. 7). The black proximity switch trace that marks the beginning of a revolution should be noticed. On this press, precompression and compression events coincide in time (they relate to different punches, of course). They are followed by the ejection and take-off. Compactibility prole When the average tablet hardness is plotted against the average compression peak force, we get the so-called compactibility prole that allows us to compare different formulations or different processing speeds. Referring to Fig. 8, which formulation is better? Well, formulation No. 2 makes harder tablets for the same compression force, and this would mean less wear and tear on the production press is required to achieve desired hardness. On the other

Fig. 7 Typical compression, precompression, and ejection waveforms.
hand, if the hardness tolerance limits are exceptionally narrow, the steeper slope of formulation No. 2 may be a detriment. Lubricant prole A certain quantity of lubricant must be present in the granulation to reduce the friction that occurs at the die wall as the tablet is being ejected, as well as to prevent sticking of the tablet to the face of the punches. Without instrumented ejection cam and take-off bar, no objective estimate of an optimal lubricant level is possible, and the best formulation is usually the last one prepared. The plot shown in Fig. 9 will help a formulator to determine the optimal amount of lubricant. Obviously, one would try to minimize the ejection force (again, to reduce wear and tear on the ejection cam of the production press), and yet to avoid the pitfalls of having too much lubricant in the formulation. Because of the natural association of lubricant properties with lipophilic materials, formulations containing high levels of lubricant can show retarded dissolution of the
active ingredient and the slow dissolution rate could adversely affect the in vivo bioavailability of the drug. Lubricant study Another important use of ejection force transducer is the evaluation of lubricants (either different chemically, or similar lubricants coming from different vendors). As shown in Fig. 10, the preferred lubricant is No. 1 as it results in a smaller ejection force. Early lubricant studies are a must. When lubricant problems occur later on in the scale-up process, corrective measures not only require additional materials and development time, but may also require a supplement of an approved new drug application (NDA). Response surface plot Formulation and process optimization can be done statistically with the use of experimental design for estimates of the best processing parameters and excipient

10
Fig. 8 Compactibility prole.
and lubricant levels. Controllable variables in tableting are mainly the precompression and compression forces and tablet press speed, as well as the formulation component levels. Response variables include the ejection force, tablet hardness and friability, dissolution rate, and drug stability. The purpose of an experimental design is to perform a series of experiments in order to determine some levels of factors that will allow us to achieve an optimal
level of dependent variables. The experiments should be designed so as to minimize effort and maximize statistical reliability of the results. Published work in this area deals mostly with response surface designs that produce a predictor polynomial equation for each response variable under consideration. A multidimensional surface is then searched for the best ranges of factor variables that, when plugged in the equations, result in the optimal value of the
Fig. 9
Lubricant prole.

11
Fig. 10
Lubricant study.
responses. In this plot (Fig. 11), the optimal (highest) hardness is obtained when the compression force is in the range 3000 4000 lb with as much MCC in the formulation as possible.[67] Compactibility studyelastic recovery Many powders, especially with viscoelastic compaction mechanism, such as starch or avicel, exhibit large degree of stress relaxation (with time-dependent deformation).
If you monitor punch displacement and compression force, you can make pretty accurate assessment of the compactibility of your material. If LVDTs are attached to both upper and lower punches, it is possible to actually measure in-die thickness of the tablet at various compression levels. In Fig. 12, one can see how the tablet thickness rapidly decreases in the compression stage and then gains some thickness during the decompression stage of the tableting cycle. The degree of this increase in
Fig. 11
Response surface plot.

12
TABLET PRESS INSTRUMENTATION FOR PROCESS TROUBLESHOOTING Typical problems in tableting include weight variation, capping, lamination, tooling irregularities, die binding, picking, and sticking. Most of such problems can be detected and/or resolved using proper instrumentation. Upper and Lower Compression Fig. 14 shows a typical set of upper and lower compression proles. One can see that the lower trace is smaller than the upper. On a single station press, only the upper punch is usually moving, and the difference is caused, mainly, by the friction of the compressed powder inside the die. On a rotary press, both punches are moving and therefore the friction of the punches inside the turret and the die causes the difference. The lower punch ts the turret with a larger standard clearance compared to the upper punch. In addition, the lower punch is never leaving the die, while the upper punch leaves and enters the die with each stroke. This results in a comparatively better alignment and lower friction. The close t of the upper punch does not allow it to penetrate the die smoothly and this can cause the increase in friction. Thus, an excessive difference between the two peaks may indicate an underlubricated die or some punch misalignment problem. Histogram of Punch Performance Similar irregularities in punch tolerances become even more visible on a bar histogram where each bar corresponds to peak force produced by each punch (Fig. 15). As the new revolution arrives, the bar lengths
Fig. 12 Compactibility studyelastic recovery.
thickness is indicative of the elastic recovery as the pressure is removed from the tablet. Elastic recovery and work of compaction were studied extensively using instrumented tablet presses.[68] Compactibility studyHeckel plot In 1961 Heckel[69,70] postulated a linear relationship between the relative porosity (inverse density) of a powder and the applied pressure. The slope of the linear regression is the Heckel constant, a material-dependent parameter inversely proportional to the mean yield pressure (the minimum pressure required to cause deformation of the material undergoing compression). Large values of the Heckel constant indicate susceptibility to plastic deformation at low pressures, when the tablet strength depends on the particle size of the original powder. The intercept of the line indicates the degree of densication by particle rearrangement (Fig. 13).
Fig. 13 Heckel plot.
Fig. 14 Upper and lower compression force vs. time.

13
Fig. 15
Histogram of compression force per punch.
are adjusted. If a particular bar persists in being taller or smaller than the rest, it means the presence of a long or short punch.
TABLET PRESS INSTRUMENTATION FOR PROCESS SCALE-UP Scale-Up Factors One of the main practical questions facing formulators during development and scale-up is: Will a particular formulation sustain the required high rate of compression force application in a production press without lamination or capping? Usually, such questions are never answered with sufcient credibility, especially when only a small amount of material is available and any trial and error approach may result in costly mistakes along the scale-up path.[71]
Press MonitorReal-Time Screen On this real-time screen (Fig. 16), one can clearly see that there is an abnormal ejection event in the rst station after the proximity switch. This is a clear indication of a sticking punch or a similar problem. In addition, the rst compression peak is somewhat taller than others. This may be caused by a long punch.
Fig. 16 Real-time screen.

14
As formulations are moved from small-scale research presses to high-speed machines, potential scale-up problems can be eliminated by simulation of production conditions in the formulation development lab. One way to eliminate potential scale-up problems is to develop formulations that are very robust with respect to processing conditions. A comprehensive database of excipients detailing their material properties may be indispensable for this purpose. However, in practical terms, this cannot be achieved without some means of testing in production environment and, because the initial drug substance is usually available in small quantities, some form of simulation is required on a small scale. Studies of tableting process on a class of equipment, generally known as compaction simulators, are designed to facilitate the development of robust formulations. However, simulators are rarely used to simulate tablet presses for reasons that will be explained later. In any process transfer from one tablet press to another, one may aim to preserve mechanical properties of a tablet (density, and, by extension, energy used to obtain it) as well as its bioavailability (e.g., dissolution that may be affected by porosity). However, a formulation that was successfully developed on a single station or small rotary press may not stand up to the challenges of scale-up because tablets that were meeting all specications in the lab or clinical studies may exhibit capping or lamination at higher speeds.[72,73] Compression force magnitude and the rate of force application are the most important variables in tableting scale-up. Force factor The compression force is the dominant factor of the tableting process. It is directly related to tablet hardness and friability, and is correlated with the phenomena of lamination and capping. It was also shown to have effect on disintegration times and dissolution prole. Speed factor As the punch speed increases, so does the porosity of tablets and their propensity to capping and lamination. The tensile strength of compacts tends to decrease with faster speeds, especially for plastic and viscoelastic materials, such as starch, lactose, avicel, ibuprofen, or paracetamol. Such materials have the tendency to cap or laminate at higher speeds.[74 88]
The notions of dwell time and contact time, to be discussed in detail later, are the common indicators of press speed and the rate of force application. Force prole factor In addition to the level of force and the rate of force application, the shape of the compression force vs. time curve is of a paramount importance because it directly affects tablet properties such as hardness and friability. It is a known fact that the compression part of the compression cycle (during the rise time of the force time prole) is 6 15 times more important than the decompression part as a factor contributing to capping and lamination. On the other hand, reducing the decompression part of the cycle results in the increase of tablet hardness by reducing the extent of elastic recovery.[89] Alternatively, reducing the compression part of the cycle results in no change of tablet strength for viscoelastic materials and increased hardness for brittle materials. Other Considerations Numerous other factors may affect the scale-up process. The quality of the measurements, variation in tooling, powder properties, and tablet weight are some of those factors.
. . . . . . .
Instrumentation grade. Measurement of speed. Measurements of mechanical strength. Tooling variation. Powder ow variation. Excipient/raw material variation. Tablet weight variation.
Dwell Time and Contact Time Matching tablet press speed (rpm) of the research and production presses has, of course, no meaning, because of different number of stations and pitch circle diameter. It is vital, therefore, to translate the rpm into dwell time or contact time. Many investigators have reported the effect of dwell times and strain rate sensitivity on the compaction of various excipients, especially viscoelastic materials.[90 94] There are at least two denitions of dwell time in practice today. Functional denitions Functionally, the effective dwell time (EDT) at 90% level can be dened as the time it taken by the force time curve

15
to traverse the 90% of the peak height. Likewise, the effective contact time (ECT) is the time between points at 10% of the peak height. The shape of the force curve depends, as we know, on the deformation mechanisms of the powder and therefore, all other variables being equal, EDT and ECT will be different for brittle and plastic materials. Although somewhat useful for material characterization, such variables should not be confused with the universally accepted denitions of contact time (time of contact) and dwell time (time of immobility). Mechanical denitions Mechanical Denitions of dwell and contact times disregard material properties and concentrate on press and punch geometry (Fig. 17). Contact time can be dened as the time the punch is in contact with the compression wheel. Dwell time is dened as the time the at portion of punch head is in contact with the compression wheel (time at maximum punch displacement, or time when the punch does not move in vertical direction). In dwell time calculations, the length of the punch head at and horizontal component of punch speed (as determined by RPM and pitch circle diameter) are used. In case of a round head tooling, the dwell time, as dened here, is zero. But it should be kept in mind that mechanical denition is given here as a convention, a yardstick, or a common measure, to compare press speeds for different presses, and its absolute value is meaningless. A proposed convention to quantify linear speed of a press is to use an Industrial Pharmaceutical Technology (IPT) Type B tooling with a known punch head at as a standard for press speed comparisons. In what follows, we will use the mechanical, rather than functional, denitions because they serve as an objective material-independent measure of compaction speed.
Dwell time comparison for different presses Comparing the dwell time ranges for a number of presses can be a gratifying experience. Here one can see that even for the same brand name, there is a wide distribution of ranges. It has to be noted that proper scale-up will be possible only when the ranges overlap. Dwell time range may also be used to classify or identify tableting equipment. The dwell time ranges vary considerably in various tablet presses. As shown in Fig. 18, Manesty Betapress is positioned well within the range of production speeds of the high-speed presses. That is, probably, why this press is often used for R&D work. On the other hand, small presses such as Korsch PH106 or Piccola do not even come close to benchmark production speeds of 6 msec 15 msec in terms of dwell time. The MCC Presstere can reach the production dwell times while making one tablet at a time. Dwell time vs. production rate For a benchmark production speed of 100,000 tablets per hour (Fig. 19), dwell time distribution follows an inverse power relationship, which is expected because dwell time is a reciprocal function of the press speed. In general, all production presses should be qualied with respect to dwell and contact times per benchmark output. Ideally, product development must be done on a laboratory press that can match (in terms of the dwell time) the target production output. Dimensional Analysis of Tableting Process Dimensional analysis is a method for producing dimensionless numbers that completely characterize the process. It is widely used in many areas, including chemical engineering and pharmaceutical industry.[71] Because all
Fig. 17 Dwell time and contact timemechanical denitions.

16
Fig. 18 Dwell time comparison for different presses.
the dimensionless numbers necessary to describe the process in similar systems must have the same numerical value,[95] matching such values on different scales is a sure way to success in any scale-up operation. This dimensionless space in which the measurements are presented or measured will make the process scale invariant. In tableting applications, the process scale-up involves different speeds of production in what is essentially the same unit volume (die cavity in which the compaction takes place). Thus, one of the conditions of the theory of models (similar geometric space) is met. However, there are still kinematic and dynamic parameters that need to be investigated and matched for any process transfer.
Scientically sound approach would be to use the results of the dimensional analysis to model a particular production environment to facilitate the scale-up of tableting process, by matching several major factors, such as compression force and rate of its application (punch velocity and displacement) in their dimensionless equivalent form.[96] TABLET PRESS AND COMPACTION SIMULATORS It can be seen that, as a rule, tablets are formulated at speeds that are very slow compared to production. If
Fig. 19
Dwell time vs. production rate.

17
simulation of a production press is required to minimize the scale-up effort, some way of speeding up the tableting process in development is required. Once the linear speed of the punch is attained, the rate of force application (i.e., the instantaneous change in compression) should also be matched. This is, of course, an innitely more difcult task. Hydraulic Compaction Simulator A small number of devices known as compaction simulators exist in the world. Invented more than 20 years ago, they become popular in basic compaction research. A wealth of studies have been generated in the last 20 years.[97 117] Compaction simulators (Fig. 20) were designed to mimic the compression cycle of any prescribed shape by using hydraulic control mechanisms that are driving a set of two punches (upper and lower) in and out of the die. All hydraulic compaction simulators are similar in design and construction. A compaction simulator consists of several main units: the load frame (column supports and crossheads with punches), the hydraulic unit (pumps and actuators that move the crossheads), and the control unit (electronic console and computer). Usually, a simulator
accepts F tooling only, but can be retrotted to use standard IPT B tooling. Under computer control, the hydraulic actuators maintain load, position, and strain associated with each punch. The simulation can be achieved by one of the two procedures: matching either the force (load control) or the movement of punches (position control) at any given moment of time. Thus, when running a simulator, one has a choice: to mimic the force/time path (compression prole) or the motion of the punches (punch displacement curves). It is impossible to mimic both at the same time on any hydraulic compaction simulator. Load control prole Matching the force time prole of a production tablet press is the primary goal of any tablet press simulation. However, the rate of force application and the shape of the resulting signal are not usually known in advance. The compression prole (force vs. time) is impossible to calculate theoretically because it has a different shape for different materials and tooling. Using an instrumented punch to collect force data is cumbersome because it is limited to a particular punch size and shape. Recalculation to pressure values is not always adequate. One can, however, monitor and record force waveform from a properly calibrated R&D grade compression transducer. Once the production press brand, model, speed, and tooling are specied, a waveform can be recorded and then fed into hydraulic simulator. This approach is impractical for formulation development work because one would need to record force waveform on a rotary press using formulation similar to the one being developed. Usually, there is no such powder available and the actual formulation being developed is available in limited quantities. Position control prole Because load control proles are not practical, users of hydraulic compaction simulators overwhelmingly prefer to utilize punch displacement proles in hope that, once the punches are forced to move in the same pattern as in the production press, the force time curve will follow. For example, a recently built laboratory compaction simulator does not have a force control functionality at all.[118] There are three possible sources of the punch position trace:
. .
Fig. 20
Schematic depiction of a compaction simulator.
Prerecorded data. Articial proles. Theoretical proles.

18
To obtain a position control prole from any tablet press, one has to record the movement of the punches using LVDT. Besides the technological challenge that this objective may present, the punch movements on a press depend on many factors, including brand name and model of the press, speed of the turret, shape of punches and die, size and shape of the tablet, and most importantly, compaction properties of the powder. The problem with this is that data from production presses are inevitably obtained using material other than the one being developed. It is a vicious circle: the proles before developing a formulation and the formulation before obtaining punch displacement proles are needed. Many compaction studies were done on compaction simulators using articial punch displacement proles, for example, the so-called single-ended prole, i.e. when the lower punch is stationary (like in a single station press). Other studies were using a saw tooth prole, i.e., a constant speed prole where punch displacement speed is constant at any given time interval under load. It is obvious that such proles have nothing to do with simulation, although they provide a degree of uniformity for basic compaction studies. The very name compaction simulator is a misnomer as is acknowledged by a number of researchers in the eld. The machine is best described as a compaction research system because it is well suited for the basic compaction studies (densication and bonding properties of materials). To simulate tablet presses, compaction simulator users most frequently employ the theoretical position control proles. Theoretical path is calculated from the geometry of the press and punches, using the radius of the compression roll, the radius of the curvature of the punch head rim, the radius of the pitch circle (distance between turret and punch axes), and the turret angular velocity.[119] The resulting sinusoidal equation is used in order to simulate punch movement in a tablet press. In practice, theoretical and actual punch displacement proles on a rotary press have very little in common because the theoretical prole does not account for several mechanical factors, such as punch head at. Moreover, the punch movement equation was derived for a punch moving in and out of an empty die. The effect of material resistance to pressure and elastic recovery is not accounted for in the equation. The discrepancies between the calculated and real punch movements are rather striking.[120 122] In addition, it was shown that the lower and upper punches may not move synchronously. Moreover, maximum force does not coincide in time with the minimum punch gap.[123] These and other considerations (press deformation, contact time, etc.) make the effort of simulating a production press on a hydraulic compaction
simulator rather impractical. That is why, to quote from a paper by Muller and Augsburger,[124] Although compaction simulator have been designed to mimic the displacement time behavior of any tablet press, they rarely have been used in that fashion. Literature sources reporting the use of compaction simulators in simulating actual tablet presses are rather scarce. Some studies suggest that, for whatever reason, tablets made on a Manesty Betapress were signicantly softer than those made on a compaction simulator using the theoretical Betapress punch displacement proles.[120,125] To summarize, one can say that hydraulic compaction simulators are ideally suited for basic compaction research but are not very practical for simulation of production presses.
Tablet Press Replicator: The Presstere Recently, a new type of machine was introduced to mimic production presses on a small scale. Known under a brand name of Pressterkind of an agglomeration of the words press, presto, and testerthis machine can be classied as a mechanical compaction simulator. The Presstere is a high-speed single station press that is also a tablet press simulator (Fig. 21). It was designed to simulate production presses without any use of hydraulic controls, and, consequently, there is no need to feed in any articial, theoretical, or prerecorded punch displacement proles. Built around a linear carriage that moves a set of punches and a die between two compression rolls, it can mimic press geometry by matching the compression wheels match press speed using a variable speed motor drive match tablet weight and thickness by adjusting depth of ll and the distance between the rolls match tooling by installing standard IPT or any special tooling. Thus, using mechanical similarity, all of the scale-up fact are matched, namely, the compression force, the speed, and the shape of the force prole. To use Presster, rst a production press to be simulate should be selected, and the compression wheels with a matching diameter should be installed. Then, production speed should be selected in terms of tablets per hour, RPM, or dwell time. The Presstere will mimic the selected production press speed and compression force prole and will allow us to make one tablet at a time. As a high-speed single station press, mechanical compaction simulator will be able to plot compressibility proles, Heckel graphs, calculate work of compaction, and virtually any other imaginable variable that is of interest to formulators. Tensile strength of tablets made on a Betapress and The Presstere was similar.[126]

19
Fig. 21 Tablet press replicator: The Presstere.
Precompression and ejection steps of the tableting cycle can be included in simulation. Some current limitations of Presster should be pointed out: It will neither follow any articial punch movement prole, nor will it address, at least in its present implementation, the issues of feeding and die ll at high speeds, or speed-related temperature uctuations.
. . .
Collection system. Packaging system. Supervisory control (SCADA) station.
PRESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL ON THE PRODUCTION FLOOR Tablet Weight Control and Tablet Force Control To keep tablet weight within the prescribed tolerance limits, the required instrumentation includes compression transducer and several proximity switches for station identication and pinpointing the compression event. Tablet weight controller can be just one, albeit a major, unit of a larger press automation system. Press automation system may include:
. . .
The latter can be a computer positioned on the supervisors desk that monitors the performance of each press on the production oor, with timely status report for each batch. There are many reasons why it is imperative to control tablet weight variation:
.
Production costs are lowered because there is less waste. Productivity is increased because there is a better equipment utilization. Batch-to-batch variability is minimized for obvious reasons.
Tablet weight control. Material handling interface. Feeding system.
When the cost of each out-of-spec wasted tablet is signicant, the savings produced by weight control quickly add up. Product quality is improved when there is less of a chance to get an out-of-spec tablet into the acceptable batch. Last, but not least, is the improved safety because the automated process requires less human intervention.

20
Control mechanisms For constant tablet thickness, in a small target area of tablet weight, compression force is directly proportional to tablet weight. Force control systems maintain compression force within prescribed limits by adjusting the depth of ll cam. The limits are established empirically for each formulation recipe. Alternatively, a weight control system would require an expressed correlation between force and tablet weight. A few tablets at different force levels can be made to correlate the resulting tablet weights with the force values. Next, one can express tablet weight tolerance limits in terms of the compression force. The weight control system can adjust the dosing to keep the tablet weight within the desired limits. For this control theory to work consistently, one needs to recalibrate force weight relationship periodically, as the powder properties and tablet mechanical condition can vary in time. Control functions include alarm and shutdown (when any individual force peak or revolution average exceeds preset limits), force or weight control (usually done on revolution average only), and rejection of out-of-spec tablets. With a mechanical gate, usually several tablets are rejected at a time, with the bad tablet being rejected along with the adjacent good tablets. With a fast pneumatic air stream rejection mechanism, the control system can pinpoint and reject one bad tablet only. Control criteria Control decisions are usually done as follows: 1. 2. 3. Adjust depth of ll cam if revolution average is outside some redened acceptable limits. Reject each tablet that exceeds individual limits or if the press speed slows down beyond some level. Sound an alarm if the same station repeatedly produces bad tablets or if revolution average exceeds alarm limits. Shut down the press if any tablet is made with a force exceeding the shutdown limits, or if revolution average is outside the shutdown limits.
the deviation over some time, or it could be tied in with the rate of change (D, for derivative) of the compression force. This would correspond to proportional, integral, or derivative control types, respectively. There also can be a combination of the control types. Thus, one can have P, I, P I, P D, and P I D control algorithms. Alternatively, a two-point control is enacted when the compression force is outside an acceptable band outlined by the upper and lower tolerance limits. Thus, there are separate control limits, rejection limits, alarm limits, and shutdown limits, and no respective action is taken when the signal is inside these limits. Strictly speaking, one-point control can be viewed as a special case of the two-point control when the bandwidth of the control limits is tightened to approach zero. Control Systems Original equipment manufacturer (OEM) control systems Almost each tablet press manufacturer offers a system that is designed to control the press. Some of these systems are very sophisticated devices that monitor and control a vast array of tableting functions. If, however, there are several brand names on the production oor, any standards in the control system implementation for different manufacturers should not be expected. Likewise, software interfaces exhibit quite a range of user-friendliness. In one brand name press, tablet weight control is achieved by regulating the dosing cam based on powder bed thickness in the precompression cycle. This clever approach is possible because precompression force is kept relatively constant by means of pneumatic compensating mechanism. Under these conditions, tablet weight is directly proportional to thickness. The subsequent compression cycle can be done to constant thickness, like on any other press. Generic control systems An alternative to OEM control systems is generic controllers that may offer plug-in compatibility with the brand name controllers and may provide a degree of standardization. However, such generic controllers may lack the degree of sophistication and versatility of the controllers that are made by the press manufacturers. One thing to keep in mind is that not all control systems are created equal, but all control systems use the same principles. A decent tablet weight control system should be based on product recipes, provide instant display of compression force distribution, control charts and batch reports on
4.
Control algorithms One-point control is a description of a control when any deviation of the compression force from a preset target level results in a corrective action of the dosing cam. This action can be proportional (P) to the deviation from the target, or it could be correlated with the integral (I) of

21
Fig. 22 Recipe example.
demand, archiving data for subsequent analysis or documentation, give some measure of standardization, be fully compliant with current validation requirements, and provide a multilevel security, e.g., password protection for operator and supervisor when they need to change recipes, etc. Some examples of displays, available to operators of instrumented production presses equipped with controllers, follow. Recipe example
tablet weight is shown. The software then converts all values into the corresponding compression force levels for control purposes. Bar histogram This chart is similar to one used in tablet press monitoring for press troubleshooting (Fig. 15). It is vital for any production press operator. Control chart
In Fig. 22, an example of a typical control recipe with dosing cam adjustment, rejection, alarm, and shutdown limits expressed as a percent deviation from the target
Control chart is a simple graph of peak compression force vs. time. Each point on the chart corresponds to the
Fig. 23 Statistical process control X-bar chart.

22
average of N tablets made, with N ranging from 1 to several revolutions. The horizontal lines would indicate the control limits. Statistical process control chart Statistical process control (SPC) chart (Fig. 23) of the averages is another must have real-time display. Each point on the chart represents a revolution average of the compression forces or corresponding tablet weights. The limit lines are calculated at one standard deviation of the mean, and there are certain rules that are used to determine when and if the process gets out of control. These rules are available in any textbook on the SPC.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Selected excerpts and gures from M. Levin, Tablet Press Instrumentation for Product Development, Process ScaleUp and Production Quality Control, Education Anytime, CD-ROM Short Course, AAPS 1999 are reprinted with permission.
REFERENCES
1. Higuchi, T.; Nelson, E.; Busse, L.W. The Physics of Tablet Compaction 3: Design and Construction of an Instrumented Tableting Machine. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1954, 43 (6), 344 348. Nelson, E.; Naqvi, S.M.; Busse, L.W.; Higuchi, T. The Physics of Tablet Compression IV: Relationship of Ejection, and Upper and Lower Punch Forces During Compressional Process. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1954, XLIII(10), 596 602. Nelson, E. The Physics of Tablet Compression VIII: Some Preliminary Measurements of Die Wall Pressure During Tablet Compression. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1955, 44, 494497. Knoechel, E.L.; Ross, H.E.; Sperry, C.C. Measurement of Force Within a Tableting Machine. US Patent 3,255,716, 1966.. Knoechel, E.L.; Sperry, C.C.; Ross, H.E. Instrumented Rotary Tablet Machines 1: Design, Construction, and Performance as Pharmaceutical Research and Development Tools. J. Pharm. Sci. 1967, 56 (1), 109 115. Knoechel, E.L.; Sperry, C.C.; Lintner, C.J. Instrumented Rotary Tablet Machines 2: Evaluation and Typical Applications in Pharmaceutical Research Development and Production Studies. J. Pharm. Sci. 1967, 56 (1), 116130. Holm, J.P., Arming Control for Servo-Adjusted Tablet Compression Machines. US Patent 3,734,663, 1973.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Hooker, D.B. Potted Strain Gage. US Patent 3,791,205, 1974. 9. Williams, J.J. Applied Instrumentation Providing Tableting Compression Force. US Patent 4,016,744, 1977. 10. Williams, J.J. Force Measurement and Analysis Particularly Relating to Rotary Tablet Presses. US Patent 4,030,868, 1977. 11. Stiel, D.M.; Browski, C.R.; Neugroschel, E.; Williams, J.J. Tablet Press Related Instrumentation for Use in Development and Control of Formulations of Pharmaceutical Granulations. US Patent 4,100,598, 1978. 12. Williams, J.J. Force Measurement and Analysis Particularly Relating to Rotary Tablet Presses. US Patent 4,099,239, 1978. 13. Stiel, D.M. Method Invoking Tableting Compression Force Control for Optimizing Tableted Formulation Parameters. US Patent 4,121,289, 1978. 14. Breen, D.T., et al. Tablet Press Controller and Method. US Patent 4,570,229, 1986. 15. Lewis, D.A., Pharmaceutical Tablet Press Control Mechanism. US Patent 4,817,006, 1989. 16. Shotton, E.; Deer, J.J.; Ganderton, D. The Instrumentation of a Rotary Tablet Machine. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1963, 5, 106T 114T. 17. Lammens, R.F.; Liem, T.B.; Polderman, J.; de Blayey, C.J. Evaluation of Force Displacement Measurements During Powder Compaction. Part 1: Precision and Accuracy of Force Measurements. Int. J. Pharm. 1980, 1 (3), 26 35. 18. Walter, J.T.; Augsburger, L. A Computerized Force Displacement Instrumentation System for a Rotary Press. Pharm. Tech. 1986, 10 (2), 26 33. 19. Jerzewski, R.L.; Rudnic, E.M. The Development of a Low-Cost Intelligent Tablet Compression Monitor Using a Personal Computer. Pharm. Tech. 1986, September,32 41. 20. Zeiss, J.C.; Beck, B.; Patel, K. Development of a Monitoring System for an Instrumented Rotary Tablet Press. Pharm. Tech. 1986, August,60 67. 21. Hunter, B.M.; Fisher, D.G.; Pratt, R.M.; Rowe, R.C. A High Speed Compression Simulator. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1976, 28S, 65P. 22. Pento, T. Procedure for Simulating Tablet Compression. US Patent 5,517,871, 1996. 23. Levin, M.; Tsygan, L.; Dukler, S. Press Simulation Apparatus. US Patent 6,106,262, 2000. 24. Schwartz, J.B. The Instrumented Tablet Press: Uses in Research and Production. Pharm. Tech. 1981, 9, 102 132. 25. Marshall, K. Instrumentation of Tablet and Capsule Filling Machines. Pharm. Tech. 1983, March,68 82. 26. Jones, T.M.; Ho, A.Y.K.; Barker, J.F. The Use of Instrumentation in Tablet Research, Development and Production. Pharm. Tech. 1985, March,42 47. 27. Celik, M.; Ruegger, C.E. An Overview of Tableting Technology, Part I: Tablet Presses and Instrumentation. Pharm. Tech. Suppl.TabGran Yearbook 1996, 20 39.

23
Ridgeway Watt, P. Tablet Machine Instrumentation in Pharmaceutics: Principles and Practice; Ellis Horwood Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 1988. 29. Munos-Ruiz, A.; Vromans, H. Data Acquisition and Measurement Techniques; Interpharm Press: Buffalo Grove, IL, 1998. 30. Vezin, W.R.; Pang, H.M.; Khan, K.A.; Malkowska, S. The Effect of Precompression in a Rotary Machine on Tablet Strength. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1983, 9 (8), 1465 1474. 31. Vezin, W.R.; Khan, K.A.; Pang, H.M. Adjustment of Precompression Force to Reduce Mixing-Time Dependence of Tablet Tensile Strength. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1983, 35, 555558. 32. Mitrevej, A.; Augsburger, L.L. Adhesion of Tablets in a Rotary Tablet Press. I. Instrumentation and Preliminary Study of Variables Affecting Adhesion. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1980, 6 (4), 331 337. 33. Mitrevej, A.; Augsburger, L.L. Adhesion of Tablets in a Rotary Tablet Press. II. Effects of Blending Time, Running Time, and Lubricant Concentration. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1982, 8 (2), 237 282. 34. Goodhart, F.W.; Mayorga, G.; Ninger, F.C. Measurement of Lower Punch Pulldown Force and Its Signicance. J. Pharm. Sci. 1969, 58 (2), 248 251. 35. Hoblitzell, J.R.; Rhodes, C.T. Determination of a Relationship Between Force Displacement and Force Time Compression Curves. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1990, 16, 201 229. 36. Ragnarsson, G.; Sjogren, J. Force Displacement Measurements in Tableting. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1984, 37, 145 150. 37. Von Schmidt, P.C.; Tenter, U. Displacement Measurements of Rotary Presses. Pharm. Ind. 1985, 426 430. 38. Walter, J.T.; Augsburger, L. A Computerized Force Displacement Instrumentation System for a Rotary Press. Pharm. Tech. 1986, 9, 26 43. 39. Nelson, E. The Physics of Tablet Compression VIII: Some Preliminary Measurements of Die Wall Pressure During Tablet Compression. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1955, 44, 494 497. 40. Long, W.M. Radial Pressures in Powder Compaction. Powder Met. 1960, 6, 73 86. 41. Windheuser, J.J.; Misra, J.; Eriksen, S.P.; Higuchi, T. The Physics of Tablet Compression. 13. Development of Die Wall Pressure During Compression of Various materials. J. Pharm. Sci. 1963, 52, 767 772. 42. Carless, J.E.; Leigh, S. Compression Characteristics of Powders: Radial Die Wall Pressure Transmission and Density Changes. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1974, 26, 289 297. 43. Carstensen, J.T.; Toure, P. Correlation Between Hysteresis Loop Areas of Lower Punch and of Die Pressures Versus Upper Punch Pressures. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1981, 7 (5), 645 648. 44. Schrank-Junghani, H.; Bier, H.P.; Sucker, H. The Measurement of Die Wall Forces to Determine the
28.
45.
46.
47. 48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
Minimum Concentration of Lubricant Needed for Tablet Formulations. Acta Pharm. Technol. 1984, 30 (3), 224 234. Cocolas, H.G.; Lordi, N.G. Axial to Radial Pressure Transmission of Tablet Excipient Using a Novel Instrumented Die. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1993, 19, 2473 2497. Hoag, S.; Renuka, N.; Muller, F. Force TransducerDesign Optimization for the Measurement of Die-Wall Stress in a Compaction Simulator. Pharm. Pharmacol. Commun. 2000, 6, 293 298. Nurnberg, E.; Hopp, A. Temperature Measurement During Tableting. Pharm. Technol. 1981, 9, 81 101. Travers, D.N.; Merriman, M.P.H. Temperature Changes Occurring During the Compression and the Recompression of Solids. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1970, 22S, 11S 16S. Ilkka, J. Instrumentation of Rotary Tablet Machine by a Portable Measuring System. In Data Acquisition and Measurement Techniques; Munoz-Ruiz, A., Vromans, H., Eds.; Interpharm Press: Buffalo Grove, IL, 1998. Matz, C.; Bauer-Brandl, A.; Rigassi, T.; Schubert, R.; Becker, D. On the Accuracy of a New Displacement Instrumentation for Rotary Tablet Presses. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1999, 25 (2), 117 130. Barra, J.; Doelker, E. Instrumentation of an Eccentric Tablet Press. In Data Acquisition and Measurement Techniques; Munoz-Ruiz, A., Vromans, H., Eds.; Interpharm Press: Buffalo Grove, IL, 1998. Hoblitzell, J.R.; Rhodes, C.T. Recent Developments in the Use of Instrumented Tablet Presses. Pharm. Int. 1985, 6, 45 50. Hoblitzell, J.R.; Rhodes, C.T. Preliminary Investigations on the Parity of Tablet Compression Data Obtained from Different Instrumented Tablet Presses. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1986, 12, 507 525. Marshall, K. Monitoring Punch Forces and Punch Movements as an Aid to Developing Robust Tablet Formulations. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1989, 15 (13), 2153 2176. Martinez-Pacheco, R.; Vila-Jato, J.L.; Souto, C. Prediction of Tablet Properties by Compression Force Time Prole Parameters. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1990, 16 (2), 231 241. Hoblitzell, J.R.; Rhodes, C.T. Instrumented Tablet Press Studies on the Effect of Some Formulation and Processing Variables. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1990, 16 (3), 469 507. Martinez-Pacheco, R.; Vila-Jato, J.L.; Souto, C. The Effect of Maximum Compression Force and Drug Content on Compression Force Time Prole Parameters. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1990, 16 (2), 243 254. Obiorah, B.A. Possible Prediction of Compression Characteristics from Pressure Cycle Plots. Int. J. Pharm. 1978, 1, 249255. Pitt, K.G.; Newton, J.M.; Stanley, P. Effects of Compaction Variables on Porosity and Material Tensile

24
Strength of Convex-Faced Aspirin Tablets. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1990, 42, 219 225. 60. Oates, R.J.; Mitchell, A.G. A New Method of Estimating Volume During Powder Compaction and the Work of Compaction on a Rotary Tablet Press from Measurements of Applied Vertical Force. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1993, 46, 270275. 61. Oates, R.J.; Mitchell, A.G. Calculation of Punch Displacement and Work of Compaction on a Rotary Tablet Press. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1989, 41, 517523. 62. Ragnarsson, G.; Sjogren, J. Work of Friction and NetWork During Compaction. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1983, 35, 201204. 63. Vogel, P.J.; Schmidt, P.C. Force Time Curves of a Modern Rotary Tablet Machine. II. Inuence of Compression Force and Tableting Speed on the Deformation Mechanisms of Pharmaceutical Substances. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1993, 19, 1917. 64. Juppo, A.M.; Kervinen, L.; Yliruusi, J. Skewness and Kurtosis of Force Time Prole Obtained from Compression of Lactose, Glucose and Mannitol Granules. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 1995, 41 (6), 374 381. 65. Ho, A.Y.K.; Jones, T.M. Punch Travel Beyond Peak Force During Tablet Compression. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1988, 40, 75P. 66. Akande, O.F.; Ford, J.L.; Rowe, P.H.; Rubinstein, M.H.; The Effects of Lag-Time and Dwell-Time on the Compaction Properties of 1:1 Paracetamol/ Microcrystalline Cellulose Tablets Prepared by Pre-compression and Main Compression. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1998, 50, 19 28. 67. Down, G.R.B.; Miller, R.A.; Chopra, S.K. Use of a DeskTop Computer in a Search-Type Optimization of Tablet Formulations. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1987, 38, 23 31. 68. Dwivedi, S.K.; Oates, R.J.; Mitchell, A.G. Estimation of Elastic Recovery, Work of Decompression and Young Modulus Using a Rotary Tablet Press. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1992, 44, 459 466. 69. Heckel, R.W. An Analysis of Powder Compaction Phenomena. Trans. Metall. Soc. 1961, 221, 1001 1008. 70. Heckel, R.W. Density Pressure Relationships in Powder Compaction. Trans. Metall. Soc. 1961, 221, 671 675. 71. Levin, M., Ed. Pharmaceutical Process Scale-Up; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2002. 72. Schwartz, J.B. Scale-Up of the Compaction and Tableting Process. In Pharmaceutical Process Scale-Up; Levin, M., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2002. 73. Strathy, W.; Gomez, A. Practical Aspects of Tableting Scale-Up. In Pharmaceutical Process Scale-Up; Levin, M., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2002. 74. Bateman, S.D.; Rubinstein, M.H.; Thacker, H.S. Properties of Paracetamol Tablets Produced Using High Precompression Pressures. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1989, 41S, 32P. 75. Bateman, S.D.; Rubinstein, M.H.; Wright, P. The Effect of Compression Speed on the Properties of Ibuprofen Tablets. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1987, 39, 66P.
76. Cook, G.P.; Summers, M.P. Effect of Compression Speed on Tensile Strength of Tablets of Binary Mixtures Containing Aspirin. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1990, 42, 462 467. 77. Danjo, K.; Kimura, H.; Otsuka, A. Inuence of Punch Velocity on the Compressibility of Granules. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1996, 22 (9&10), 933942. 78. Fell, J.T.; Newton, J.M. Effect of Particle Size and Speed of Compaction on Density Changes in Tablets of Crystalline and Spray-Dried Lactose. J. Pharm. Sci. 1971, 60, 1866 1869. 79. Garr, J.S.M.; Rubinstein, M.H. An Investigation into the Capping of Paracetamol at Increasing Speeds of Compression. Int. J. Pharm. 1991, 72, 117 122. 80. Garr, J.S.M.; Rubinstein, M.H. The Effect of Rate of Force Application on the Properties of Microcrystalline Cellulose and Dibasic Calcium Phosphate Mixtures. Int. J. Pharm. 1991, 73, 75 80. 81. Holman, L.E.; Leuenberger, H. Effect of Compression Speed on the Relationship Between Normalized Solid Fraction and Mechanical Properties of Compacts. Int. J. Pharm. 1989, 57, R1 R5. 82. Marshall, P.V.; York, P.; Maclaine, J.Q. An Investigation of the Effect of the Punch Velocity on the Compaction Properties of Ibuprofen. Powder Technol. 1993, 74, 171 177. 83. Marshall, P.V.; York, P.; Richardson, R. The Effect of Duration of Compression on the Axial Recovery Properties of Compacts of a Crystalline Drug Substance. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1986, 38, 47P. 84. Monedero, M.; Jime nez-Castellanos, M.R.; Velasco, M.V.; Munoz-Ruiz, A. Effect of Compression Speed and Pressure on the Physical Characteristics of Maltodextrin Tablets. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1998, 24 (7), 613 621. 85. Rees, J.E.; Rue, P.J. Time-Dependent Deformation of Some Direct Compression Excipients. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1978, 30, 601 607. 86. Ritter, A.; Sucker, H.B. Studies of Variables That Affect Tablet Capping. Pharm. Tech. 1980, March,57 62. 87. Roberts, R.J.; Rowe, R.C. The Effect of Punch Velocity on the Compaction of a Variety of Materials. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1985, 37, 377 384. 88. Roberts, R.J.; Rowe, R.C. The Effect of Relationship Between Punch Velocity and Particle Size on the Compaction Behaviour of Materials with Varying Deformation Mechanisms. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1986, 38, 567 571. 89. Yliruusi, J.K.; Antikainen, O. New Parameters Derived from Tablet Compression Curves. Part I. Force Time Curve. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1997, 23 (1), 69 79. 90. Armstrong, N.A. Time-Dependent Factors Involved in Powder Compression and Tablet Manufacture. Int. J. Pharm. 1989, 49, 1 13. 91. Armstrong, N.A.; Blundell, L.P. The Effect of Machine Speed on the Compaction of Some Directly Compressible Tablet Diluents. Pharmacology. 1985, 37, 28P.

25
92.
93.
94.
95. 96.
97.
98.
99.
100. 101. 102.
103.
104.
105.
106. 107.
108.
Armstrong, N.A. Considerations of Compression Speed in Tablet Manufacture. Pharm. Tech. 1990, 9, 106 116. Munoz-Ruiz, A., et al. Theoretical Estimation of Dwell and Consolidation Times in Rotary Tablet Machines. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1992, 18 (9), 2011 2028. Akande, O.F.; Ford, J.L.; Rubinstein, M.H. Effect of Dwell Times on the Pre- and Main Compression of a 1:1 Paracetamol: Microcrystalline Cellulose. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1995, 47, 1102. Zlokarnik, M. Dimensional Analysis and Scale-Up in Chemical Engineering, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1991. Levin, M.; Zlokarnik, M. Dimensional Analysis of the Tableting Process. In Pharmaceutical Process Scale-Up, Levin, M., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2002. Mann, S.C.; Roberts, R.J.; Rowe, R.C.; Hunter, B.M. The Inuence of Precompression Pressure on Capping. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1982, 34, 49P. Mann, S.C.; Roberts, R.J.; Rowe, R.C.; Hunter, B.M.; Rees, J.E. The Effect of High Speed Compression at Subatmospheric Pressure on the Capping Tendency of Pharmaceutical Tablets. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1983, 35, 44P. Yang, L.; Venkatesh, G.; Fassihi, R. Characterization of Compactibility and Compressibility of Poly(Ethylene Oxide) Polymers for Modied Release Application by Compaction Simulator. J. Pharm. Sci. 1985, 85, 1085 1090. Bateman, S.D. A Comparative Investigation of Compression Simulators. Int. J. Pharm. 1989, 49, 209212. Bateman, S.D. High Speed Compression Simulators in Tableting Research. Pharm. J. 1988, 240, 632 633. Bateman, S.D.; Rubinstein, M.H.; Rowe, R.C.; Roberts, R.J.; Drew, P.; Ho, A.Y.K. A Comparative Investigation of Compression Simulators. Int. J. Pharm. 1989, 49, 209 212. Celik, M.; Marshall, K. Use of a Compaction Simulator System in Tableting Research. Part 1: Introduction to and Initial Experiments with the System. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1989, 15 (5), 759 800. Celik, M.; Lordi, N.G. The Pharmaceutical Compaction Research Laboratory and Information Center. Pharm. Tech. 1991, 3, 112 116. Rubinstein, M.H. Compaction Properties of a Cellulose Lactose Direct-Compression Excipient. Pharm. Tech. 1991, 4, 76 80. Rubinstein, M.H. Applications of Compaction Simulators. Pharm. Manuf. Int. 1992, 177 182. Celik, M.; Driscoll, C.E. An Overview of the Effects of Some Physico-Chemical and Mechanical Characteristics of Particulates on the Compaction and Post-compaction Properties of Compacts. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1993, 19, 2119 2141. Celik, M.; Ong, J.T.H.; Chowhan, Z.T.; Samuel, G.J. Compaction Simulator Studies of a New Drug Substance: Effect of Particle Size and Shape, and Its Binary Mixtures
with Microcrystalline Cellulose. Pharm. Dev. Tech. 1996, 1, 119 126. 109. CSUG. Compaction Simulator Users Group Meeting Standards. http://www.bath.ac.uk/ (accessed March 23, 1996). 110. CSUG. Compaction Simulator Users Group Meeting Standards. http://www.bath.ac.uk/ (accessed July 3, 1996). 111. CSUG. Minutes of the Compaction Simulator Users Group. http://www.bath.ac.uk/ (accessed October 2, 1996). 112. Asgharnejad, M.; Storey, D. Application of a Compaction Simulator to the Design of a High-Dose Tablet Formulation. Part I. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 1996, 22 (9&10), 967 975. 113. Nokhodchi, A.; Rubinstein, M.H. Compaction Simulators in Tableting Research. Pharm. Tech. Suppl.TabGran Yearbook 1996, 6, 18. 114. Razaghi, A.M.; Venkatesh, G., Fassihi, R., Consolidation and Compaction Behavior of Sorbitol in Pharmaceutical Technology: A Compaction Simulator Study. AAPS Meeting, November 1997. 115. Yang, L.; Venkatesh, G.; Fassihi, R. Compaction Simulator Study of a Novel Triple-Layer Tablet Matrix for Industrial Tableting. Int. J. Pharm. 1997, 152, 45 52. 116. Barnett, M.E.; Muller, F.X.; Venkatesh, G.M., Characterization of the Tableting Properties of Four Drug Substances Using a Compaction Simulator and Hiestand Indices of Tableting Performance. AAPS Meeting, November 1998. 117. Kim, H.; Venkatesh, G.; Fassihi, R. Compactibility Characterization of Granular Pectin for Tableting Operation Using a Compaction Simulator. Int. J. Pharm. 1998, 161, 149 159. 118. Carlson, G.T.; Christie, H.R.; Curtiss, A.C.; Hausberger, A.G.; Jarvas, R.E.; Jaxheimer, B.A.; Schelhom, J.J.; Sinko, C.M. Design, Fabrication and Start-Up of a Laboratory Scale Compaction Simulator. AAPS Meeting, November 1998. 119. Rippie, E.G.; Danielson, D.W. Viscoelastic Stress/Strain Behavior of Pharmaceutical Tablets: Analysis During Unloading and Postcompression Periods. J. Pharm. Sci. 1981, 70, 476 482. 120. Ruegger, C.D. An Investigation of the Effect of Compaction Proles on the Tableting Properties of Pharmaceutical Materials. Ph.D. Thesis, 1996. 121. Oates, R.J.; Mitchell, A.G. Comparison of Calculated and Experimentally Determined Punch Displacement on a Rotary Tablet Press Using Both Manesty and IPT Punches. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1990, 42, 388 396. 122. Pedersen, M.A.; Rubinstein, M.H.; Bateman, S.D. Measuring Punch Time Displacement Proles on a Rotary Tableting Machine Using a High-Speed Video System. Pharm. Tech. 1993, 4, 44 52. 123. Dwivedi, S.K.; Oates, R.J.; Mitchell, A.G. Peak Offset Times as an Indication of Stress Relaxation During

26
124.
Tableting on a Rotary Tablet Press. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1991, 43, 673 678. Muller, F.X.; Augsburger, L.L. The Role of the Displacement Time Waveform in the Determination of Heckel Behavior Under Dynamic Conditions in a Compaction Simulator and a Fully Instrumented Rotary Tablet Machine. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1994, 46, 468 475.
125. Venkatesh, G., Pudipeddi, M., Faulkner, P., Correlations Between Compaction Simulator and Instrumented Betapress. AAPS Meeting, November 1993. 126. Venkatesh, G.M.; Lamey, K.A.; Levin, M.; Murphy, S., Correlations Between a Hydraulic Compaction Simulator, Instrumented Manesty Betapress, and the Presstere. AAPS Meeting, November 1999.

Tablet Press Instrumentation

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Tablet Press Instrumentation

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

MARCEL DEKKER, INC.

270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016