John Barratt discusses how an established tracking system used in TV and movies is being adapted for the process industries

IN THE chemical industry there is often much debate as to whether a process should be batch or continuous. Most processes at low production volumes start off as batch, largely because this is the way they are first developed in the laboratory. Chemical engineers spend time scaling up these processes to improve economic performance and satisfy increasing demand. And when demand reaches a particular level, a process is converted to continuous due to the greater economies of scale and the efficiencies that come from continuous operation. In continuous operation each part of the plant is used all the time, while in a batch plant equipment often stands idle while different steps in the process take place.

Customer demands, driven by end-consumer desires are getting more complex, making the case for batch. So how do we make batch processing more efficient?

The batch or continuous question was often debated in the Process Engineering Group at ICI where I worked in the 1990s. Tasked with designing a laundry detergent plant on an industrial scale, my initial conventional design became untenable as customers’ needs became more complex. An experienced colleague suggested I redesign it as “pipeless” (ie batch) – to solve the problems I was facing with complexity, flexibility and avoiding cross contamination. What resulted was a cheaper plant that was more adaptable and responsive to customer needs.

The only drawback was that it required a significant number of operators, moving intermediate bulk containers between mixing, blending and formulation stages (such plants do exist in the chemical industry, but this type of operation is more common in the food and formulation industries).

In 2009, as Core Technology Officer at BASF, I looked at what technology was available that might improve manufacturing at BASF generally, and for my business area in particular.

Most of BASF’s process plants are highly automated, typically using distributed control systems for process control. Most operators now spend their time in the control room monitoring the automated system and checking the operation of the plant. However, for many plants much of the raw materials are transported to the plant in intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) and flexible intermediate bulk containers (FIBCs). Similarly, the products are often packed in IBCs, FIBCs or 25 kg bags. Even in highly automated specialty chemical plants, labour is a major operational cost. In most plants, further automation of the process is quite expensive and does not yield significant labour saving. However, the transport of raw materials and product to and from the plant uses a large amount of labour and would seem a key area to target.

This got me thinking that if industries such as automotive, warehouse and customer fulfilment can use automatic guided vehicles (AGVs) extensively to move parts and packages, then could we not do the same for raw materials and products in the chemical and process industries, where this is not widely adopted? After consulting with internal experts, Innovate UK, and the manufacturing catapult centres, it became clear that improved technology was required if my dreams were to become a practical reality.

I found that the existing guidance technologies were not well suited to process industry environments (see Table 1). For example, weakened signal due to metallic structures and equipment is a particular issue. Having a sterile environment where only AGVs are allowed to operate works well in automotive and warehouse environments but was less practical in process industries where maintenance activities, people and other vehicles do need to be present. Also, most AGVs do not have the ATEX certification to work in potentially inflammable atmospheres.

To significantly further automate plants, autonomous material handling is required. This requires the transfer of liquids and solids and potentially even gasses fully autonomously. To do this, safe zero-loss couplings exist but the ability to operate these with AGVs was not possible due to the inaccuracies in guidance and other reasons explained earlier.

Fast forward to 2018, where I met Michael Geissler at a trade show. His firm Mo-Sys has developed several world-leading camera tracking technologies used in media, television, film and professional virtual reality. In this field, accurate tracking of a moving camera is vital to special effects and combining virtual and the real picture. It must be done seamlessly in real time – otherwise the effect is destroyed. In our discussions we realised that we could potentially apply the company’s StarTracker technology to AGVs in the process sector to provide real-time accurate positional information.

You need to be logged in to read the rest of this article

Business Development Director for Process Industries at Mo-Sys Engineering

This article has been featured in:

Question Time: Built Environment & Transport

Industry X.0 – The Next Stage

Developing a Justification for a DCS Migration

A conversation with the experts: watch the recordings of our previous webinars and sign-up to attend future online webcasts.

You do not have to be a chemical engineer to join IChemE. Our global membership community includes people from a range of disciplines who have an interest in and/or relevant experience in chemical engineering and our membership rates range from a low single fee for students to annual subscriptions for professional Members.

Catch up on the latest news, views and jobs from The Chemical Engineer. Below are the four latest issues. View a wider selection of the archive from within the Magazine section of this site.

We offer readers a flexible range of subscription options and you are certain to find one that suits your needs.

Chemical Engineer (Experienced) - GPS

© 2022 Institution of Chemical Engineers