Investigation of Dynamic Multivariate Chemical Process Monitoring

Abstract Chemical process variables are always driven by random noise and disturbances. The closed-loop control yields process measurements that are auto and cross correlated. The influence of auto and cross correlations on statistical process control (SPC) is investigated in detail by Monte Carlo experiments. It is revealed that in the sense of average performance, the false alarms rates (FAR) of principal component analysis (PCA), dynamic PCA are not affected by the time-series structures of process variables. Nevertheless, non-independent identical distribution will cause the actual FAR to deviate from its theoretic value apparently and result in unexpected consecutive false alarms for normal operating process. Dynamic PCA and ARMA-PCA are demonstrated to be inefficient to remove the influences of auto and cross correlations. Subspace identification-based PCA (SI-PCA) is proposed to improve the monitoring of dynamic processes. Through state space modeling, SI-PCA can remove the auto and cross correlations efficiently and avoid consecutive false alarms. Synthetic Monte Carlo experiments and the application in Tennessee Eastman challenge process illustrate the advantages of the proposed approach.

[1]  Barry M. Wise,et al.  The process chemometrics approach to process monitoring and fault detection , 1995 .

[2]  M. P. Callao,et al.  Time series: a complementary technique to control charts for monitoring analytical systems , 2003 .

[3]  Christos Georgakis,et al.  Disturbance detection and isolation by dynamic principal component analysis , 1995 .

[4]  Richard D. Braatz,et al.  Fault detection in industrial processes using canonical variate analysis and dynamic principal component analysis , 2000 .

[5]  Xie Lei On-line Fault Diagnosis in Industrial Processes Using Variable Moving Window and Hidden Markov Model , 2005 .

[6]  Ali Cinar,et al.  Statistical process and controller performance monitoring. A tutorial on current methods and future directions , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 American Control Conference (Cat. No. 99CH36251).

[7]  Wang Shuqing A Robust Statistical Batch Process Monitoring Framework and Its Application , 2004 .

[8]  Manabu Kano,et al.  Comparison of statistical process monitoring methods: application to the Eastman challenge problem , 2000 .

[9]  A. J. Morris,et al.  Statistical performance monitoring of dynamic multivariate processes using state space modelling , 2002 .

[10]  N. Lawrence Ricker,et al.  Decentralized control of the Tennessee Eastman Challenge Process , 1996 .

[11]  Wang Gang,et al.  Double Moving Window MPCA for Online Adaptive Batch Monitoring , 2005 .

[12]  John F. MacGregor,et al.  Multivariate SPC charts for monitoring batch processes , 1995 .

[13]  A. Negiz,et al.  Statistical monitoring of multivariable dynamic processes with state-space models , 1997 .

[14]  Manabu Kano,et al.  Comparison of multivariate statistical process monitoring methods with applications to the Eastman challenge problem , 2002 .

[15]  Junghui Chen,et al.  On-line batch process monitoring using dynamic PCA and dynamic PLS models , 2002 .

[16]  E. F. Vogel,et al.  A plant-wide industrial process control problem , 1993 .

[17]  George W. Irwin,et al.  Improved principal component monitoring of large-scale processes , 2004 .