Avoid Suboptimal Solutions

The common mistake in determining ATmin opt is optimizing subsystems. To avoid this, the battery boundary for a process unit should be determined from the feed to products. The following issues should be addressed to define the process boundary  

To illustrate possible occurance of suboptimal solutions, let us consider an example of the hydrocracking process, which makes transportation products. The data were extracted from process simulation and it was assumed that the feed preheating and reaction sections are designed first followed by the fractionation section. 

However, if aU these sections are considered simultaneously in one design boundary, the cost targeting indicates the AT n opt range of 65-70 °F. By integrating 

Let us see the effect on total cost. If the heat recovery system for reaction and fractionation sections are designed separately, ATuun opt will be at around 60 °F for the reaction section resulting in the total annualized cost at around 13MM/year 

---

For specialty chemicals production networks, the planning and controlling process has to combine the site perspective and the value chain perspective. Most specialty chemicals companies have a division/business unit organization and operate sites shared by several divisions. While each division can cover the value chain perspective individually, for example by integrating the above-mentioned indicators into controlling processes, the site perspective requires cross-divisional coordination to avoid suboptimal solutions. Different options ranging from centralized to decentralized setups exist to do so (cf. Hayes and Wheelwright 1984, pp. 120-125). 

What sections should be included in the boundary In general, a process includes feed preparation, reaction, fractionation and separation, heat recovery, and product delivery sections. To avoid suboptimal solutions for AT , these sections should be included when determining ATmin opt-... 

This approach operates in two phases. First, a sufficient number of elements is found in order to satisfy the linearization of all of the constraints at the initial point. In this way we guarantee that a feasible QP subproblem exists for (27). Second, to avoid convergence to a suboptimal solution with too few elements, we retain additional dummy elements in the formulation that are constrained to be less than or equal to a negligible element length. These elements can be placed at all nonzero element locations, but in practice they need only be associated with elements that have active error bounds at the QP solution. Now once the QP subproblem is solved, multipliers on the upper bounds of the dummy elements are checked for positive values. These indicate that the objective function can be further improved by relaxing the dummy element. After relaxation (which effectively adds another nonzero element to the problem), another dummy element is added in order to allow for any additional nonzero elements that may be needed. 

Thus, the solution of the MILP problem is started by solving the first relaxed LP problem. If integer values are obtained for the binary variables, the problem has been solved. However, if integer values are not obtained, the use of bounds is examined to avoid parts of the tree that are known to be suboptimal. The node with the best noninteger solution provides a lower bound for minimization problems and the node with the best feasible... 

Once the true cause of a problem has been identified, devising a solution that avoids these difficulties in subsequent batches is usually straightforward. In many cases it is necessary to isolate and identify a new impurity in order to determine the reason behind suboptimal yields. 

The important role played by the solution fill depth in determining the sublimation rate has already been touched upon and can hardly be overstated. It depends on the shape of the containing vessel in relation to the fill volume. Ideally, a fill depth of 5 mm is to be recommended. Freeze-drying of chemically labile products at fill depths in excess of 20 mm is to be avoided. Where for pharmacokinetic or other reasons e.g. solubility) a certain volume is prescribed for the administration of the reconstituted solution, the limitation of fill depth has to be achieved by other means. This often involves the use of a vial with a larger-than-ideal diameter. For reasons of cost and suboptimal utilisation of freeze-drier... 

---