1 / 71

TOPICS TODAY

TOPICS TODAY. PROCESS Design Modeling Optimization Improvement Quality Control. THE TERRIBLE MISUNDERSTANDING:. WE BELIEVE TO KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING!. TRAPS. THE LACK OF IMAGINATION TRAP. THE LACK OF INSIGHT TRAP. THE INTERDISCIPLINARY TRAP. THE TINKERING AROUND TRAP.

smithpamela
Télécharger la présentation

TOPICS TODAY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TOPICS TODAY PROCESS • Design • Modeling • Optimization • Improvement • Quality Control

  2. THE TERRIBLE MISUNDERSTANDING: • WE BELIEVE TO KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING!

  3. TRAPS • THE LACK OF IMAGINATION TRAP. • THE LACK OF INSIGHT TRAP. • THE INTERDISCIPLINARY TRAP. • THE TINKERING AROUND TRAP.

  4. PROCESS DESIGNPHOSGENATION OF AMINES THIS IS THE SKETCH WE FIND IN A PREPARATIVE ORGANIC CHEMISTRY HANDBOOK

  5. PROCESS DESIGNPHOSGENATION OF AMINES THIS IS HOW THE PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LOOKS!

  6. THE LACK OF IMAGINATION TRAP REJECTED PROCESS DESIGNPHOSGENATION OF AMINES THIS IS HOW THE PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LOOKS LIKE!

  7. THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES R-NH2 + COCl2 R - NH - CO - Cl + HCl + XkJ (1) R - NH - CO - Cl + ykJ R - N = C = O + HCl (2) THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAPPEN, AND IT DOES

  8. THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES BUT… THERE IS A LOT MORE GOING ON! R-NH2 + COCl2 R - NH - CO - Cl + HCl + XkJ (1) R - NH - CO - Cl + ykJ R - N = C = O + HCl (2) R - N = C = O + R-NH2 R - NH - CO - NH - R (3) R-NH2 + R - NH - CO - Cl R - NH - CO - NH - R + HCl (4) R-NH2 + HCl R-NH2 . HCl (5) + zkJ

  9. THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES WE NOW HAVE A NETWORK OF REACTIONS, ALL INTERRELATED. R-NH2 + COCl2 R - NH - CO - Cl + HCl + XkJ (1) R - NH - CO - Cl + ykJ R - N = C = O + HCl (2) R - N = C = O + R-NH2 R - NH - CO - NH - R (3) R-NH2 + R - NH - CO - Cl R - NH - CO - NH - R + HCl (4) R-NH2 + HCl R-NH2 . HCl (5) EVERY REACTION HAS OF COURSE ITS OWN THERMOCHEMICAL AND KINETIC CHARACTERISTICS. + zkJ

  10. THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES AS COMPLICATED AS THIS MAY LOOK, IT IS STILL A RIDICULOUS OVER-SIMPLIFICATION. ISOCYANATES WILL, AMONG THEMSELVES FORM STRUCTURES LIKE THE FOLLOWING: O O R C C N R N N R AND R N C O C C N O O R

  11. THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • ALL THOSE REACTIONS • HAVE THEIR PARTICULAR THERMOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES. • HAVE THEIR OWN KINETICS (PARTLY UNKNOWN). • COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER OF THE SAME REACTANT. • CONSUME EACH OTHER’S REACTION PRODUCTS.

  12. THE LACK OF INSIGHT TRAP REJECTED THE CHEMISTRYPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • ALL THOSE REACTIONS • HAVE THEIR PARTICULAR THERMOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES. • HAVE THEIR OWN KINETICS (PARTLY UNKNOWN). • COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER OF THE SAME REACTANT. • CONSUME EACH OTHER’S REACTION PRODUCTS.

  13. THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • IF ALL THAT IS NOT YET SUFFICIENT TO MAKE YOU UNHAPPY, I HAVE MORE. PHYSICS WILL PROVE TOUGHER THAN CHEMISTRY! • WE WILL HAVE TO CARRY THIS OUT IN A REACTOR. HOW SHOULD THAT REACTOR LOOK LIKE? • IDEALLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO MIX THE AMINE WITH PHOSGENE, AND IMMEDIATELY TAKE OUT THE CARBAMATE AS IT IS FORMED. WE COULD THEN, IN A SECOND STEP CRACK THE CARBAMATE, AND IMMEDIATELY TAKE OUT THE ISOCYANATE. THAT HOWEVER IS NOT QUITE FEASIBLE. • WE WILL HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONCURRENT AND SEQUENTIAL REACTIONS IN A REAL WORLD PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

  14. THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES LET US TAKE A REACTION LIKE A + B C + xkJ REACTION SPEED IS REPRESENTED BY: d [ C ] = K . [ A ] . [ B ] dt K IS A FUNCTION OF THE TEMPERATURE T BUT T IS ITSELF A FUNCTION OF THE REACTION SPEED!

  15. THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES THE WHOLE THING HAPPENS IN SPACE AND TIME. Y Z X THOSE ARE RELATED BY (POORLY UNDERSTOOD) TRANSPORTATION MECHANISMS, HYDRODYNAMICS AND DIFFUSION BEING SOME.

  16. Y Z P X THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • EVERY POINT P, HAS, AT ANY GIVEN TIME A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES: • TEMPERATURE • A GIVEN CONCENTRATION FOR EVERY COMPONENT.

  17. THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • THEN, THERE ARE THREE PHASES INVOLVED: • GAS • LIQUID • SOLID • THE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN THOSE ARE ALSO GOVERNED BY AN OWN SET OF EQUILIBRIA, AGAIN DEPENDING ON: • TEMPERATURE • PRESSURE • THE CONCENTRATION OF EVERY COMPONENT. • ON TOP OF THAT, STRANGE THINGS HAPPEN AT THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN PHASES. • EVEN THE GEOMETRY OF THAT BOUNDARY WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO DETERMIN.

  18. THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • CAN YOU IMAGINE • A CHEMIST • A PHYSICIST • A MATHEMATICIAN • AND • AN ENGINEER • DISCUSSING THESE ISSUES?

  19. THE INTERDISCIPLINARY TRAP REJECTED THE PHYSICSPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • CAN YOU IMAGINE • A CHEMIST • A PHYSICIST • A MATHEMATICIAN • AND • AN ENGINEER • DISCUSSING THESE ISSUES?

  20. THE CORRECTIVE APPROACHPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • SO HERE WE ARE WITH A SYSTEM LOOKING LIKE • Y = F (X1, X2, X3, … , Xn) • AND WE HAVE NO CLUE! • WE HAVE AN OLD AND PROVEN METHOD TO DEAL WITH THIS KIND OF PROBLEM. • WE KEEP EVERYTHING CONSTANT, BUT X1 • WE CAUTIOUSLY MODIFY X1 IN EQUIDISTANT STEPS. • WE OBSERVE WHAT THAT DOES TO Y

  21. THE CORRECTIVE APPROACHPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • THE RESULTS OF THIS METHOD ARE VERY PROMISING: • WE MAKE ALL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PARAMETERS • TOTALLY INVISIBLE. • THIS ENORMOUSLY SIMPLIFIES OUR UNDERSTANDINGOF • THE SYSTEM. • UNFORTUNATELY IT DOES NOTHING TO SIMPLIFY THE SYSTEM • ITSELF!

  22. THE TINKERING AROUND TRAP REJECTED THE CORRECTIVE APPROACHPHOSGENATION OF AMINES • SO HERE WE ARE WITH A SYSTEM LOOKING LIKE • Y = F (X1, X2, X3, … , Xn) • AND WE HAVE NO CLUE! • WE HAVE AN OLD AND PROVEN METHOD TO DEAL WITH THIS KIND OF PROBLEM. • WE KEEP EVERYTHING CONSTANT, BUT X1 • WE CAUTIOUSLY MODIFY X1 IN EQUIDISTANT STEPS. • WE OBSERVE WHAT THAT DOES TO Y • THE RESULTS OF THIS METHOD ARE VERY PROMISING: • WE MAKE ALL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PARAMETERS • TOTALLY INVISIBLE. • THIS ENORMOUSLY SIMPLIFIES OUR UNDERSTANDING OF • THE SYSTEM.

  23. SOME QUESTIONS: • HOW FAR ARE WE FROM THE OPTIMUM? • WHAT ARE OUR CHANCES TO GET CONSIDERABLY BETTER? • WOULD MODELING, EVEN IF NOT BASED ON THE FULL SET OF • RELEVANT INFORMATION HELP? • HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE LOSE DUE TO OUR DISTANCE FROM • THE ACHIEVABLE OPTIMUM? • WHAT WOULD IT COST TO COLLECT THE RELEVANT • INFORMATION?

  24. SOME OBSERVATIONS: • SO FAR, WE HAVE ONLY DEALT WITH ONE UNIT OPERATION • WITHIN ONE PROCESS. • THE MUCH HERALDED “VERBUND” HAS NEVER BEEN DEALT • WITH IN A SCIENTIFIC WAY. • THIS IS OF COURSE ABOUT MONEY, BUT NOT JUST ABOUT • MONEY. THERE ARE CONSIDERABLE SAFETY AND • ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS. • THE GENERAL LACK OF INTEREST FROM TOP MANAGEMENT • STANDS IN STARK CONTRAST TO THE IMPORTANCE OF • MATHEMATICAL MODELING AND OPTIMIZATION.

  25. SOME ANSWERS AND ANOTHER QUESTION: • YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER WAYS TO ADDRESS THIS. • YOU COULD ALMOST CERTAINLY FIND IMPROVEMENTS THAT • AMOUNT TO TANGIBLE FINANCIAL RESULTS. • THE LEAST THAT WOULD HAPPEN WOULD BE AN IMPROVED • UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS, ENTAILING BETTER • CONTROL OVER PRODUCT QUALITY AND PROPERTIES. • BUT • NOBODY IS GOING TO AKS YOU! WHY???

  26. WHY IS THERE • SO LITTLE INTEREST • SO LITTLE SUPPORT • SO MUCH SCEPTICISM • FOR SUCH A PROMISING TOOL?

  27. THE PROBLEM: • OUR • UNDERSTANDING OF • DEALING WITH • RESPECT FOR • REALITY

  28. WHAT IS REALITY? • IS THIS ROCK REALITY? • RATHER LIKELY IT IS. • BUT WHAT IS THE MORE IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS REALITY “ROCK”? • IS IT THE MATERIAL? • IS IT THE SHAPE? • IS IT JOHN’S OPINION ABOUT THIS ROCK? • IS IT THE HARMONIOUS CONTRIBUTION TO A ROMANTIC LANDSCAPE? • IS IT WHAT MARTHA FEELS WHEN SHE OBSERVES THEROCK AT SUNSET? • IS IT THE SUM OF ALL THIS?

  29. WHAT IS REALITY? • “I had a dream that I was a butterfly. I woke up, and from now on I will never know whether I am a man that dreamt to be a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming to be a man.”

  30. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  31. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  32. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  33. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  34. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY

  35. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! CAN THIS WORK? THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY

  36. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! CAN THIS WORK? THE MIND IT’S ALL JUST A MATTER OF IMAGINATION!!! BIOLOGICAL REALITY

  37. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY

  38. REALITY COMES IN LAYERS AND WITH AN HIERARCHY! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY

  39. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN!

  40. “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. “Richard Feynman.Nobel Prize Physics.

  41. THE PROBLEM: ON THE LEVEL OF OUR MIND, WE ARE ABLE TO PRETEND THAT ALL THE ABOVE IS NOT SO! THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  42. QUESTIONS ABOUT OBJECTIVE REALITY • HOW ARE OUR PRODUCTS CONTRIBUTING TO OUR CUSTOMER'S SUCCESS? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE IS OUR PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE IS OUR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE ARE OUR SUPPLY CHAINS? • HOW GOOD IS OUR INNOVATIVE POTENTIAL? • HOW SOLID ARE OUR FINANCES? • HOW WELL ARE WE COMPLYING WITH THE LAW? • WHAT LONG TERM RETURN ARE WE PRODUCING FOR OUR SHAREHOLDERS?

  43. QUESTIONS ABOUT OBJECTIVE REALITY • HOW ARE OUR PRODUCTS CONTRIBUTING TO OUR CUSTOMER'S SUCCESS? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE IS OUR PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE IS OUR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY? • HOW SOLID AND RELIABLE ARE OUR SUPPLY CHAINS? • HOW GOOD IS OUR INNOVATIVE POTENTIAL? • HOW SOLID ARE OUR FINANCES? • HOW WELL ARE WE COMPLYING WITH THE LAW? • WHAT LONG TERM RETURN ARE WE PRODUCING FOR OUR SHAREHOLDERS?

  44. WHERE DOES THIS HAPPEN? THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  45. QUESTIONS ABOUT SUBJECTIVE REALITY • HOW DO OUR CUSTOMERS PERCEIVE OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES? • ARE WE PERCEIVED AS A RELIABLE SUPPLIER? • HOW ARE WE PERCEIVED BY THE MARKET PLACE? • WHAT IS OUR STANDING IN THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY? • HOW ARE WE PERCEIVED BY OUR EMPLOYEES? • WHAT OPINION DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE ABOUT US?

  46. QUESTIONS ABOUT SUBJECTIVE REALITY • HOW DO OUR CUSTOMERS PERCEIVEOUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES? • ARE WE PERCEIVEDAS A RELIABLE SUPPLIER? • HOW ARE WE PERCEIVEDBY THE MARKET PLACE? • WHAT IS OUR STANDING IN THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY? • HOW ARE WE PERCEIVED BY OUR EMPLOYEES? • WHAT OPINION DOES THE GOVERNMENT HAVE ABOUT US?

  47. WHERE DOES THIS HAPPEN? THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

  48. INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS ABOUT OBJECTIVE REALITY • ARE MY PROJECTS ON TIME AND ON BUDGET? • WILL I MAKE THE PROJECTED NET CASH FLOW? • CAN SOMETHING BE DONE TO IMPROVE THE YIELD OF PLANT X? • HOW CAN THE 10% REDUCTION IN FORCE TARGET BE MET? • WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE OUR PRICE INCREASE HOLD? • WHO CAN SOLVE CUSTOMER Y'S PROBLEM? • WHAT LESSONS ARE TO BE LEARNED FROM THE FAILURE OF PROJECT Z?

  49. INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS ABOUT OBJECTIVE REALITY • ARE MY PROJECTS ON TIME AND ON BUDGET? • WILL I MAKE THE PROJECTED NET CASH FLOW? • CAN SOMETHING BE DONE TO IMPROVE THE YIELD OF PLANT X? • HOW CAN THE 10% REDUCTION IN FORCE TARGET BE MET? • WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE OUR PRICE INCREASE HOLD? • WHO CAN SOLVE CUSTOMER Y'S PROBLEM? • WHAT LESSONS ARE TO BE LEARNED FROM THE FAILURE OF PROJECT Z?

  50. WHERE DOES THIS HAPPEN? THE MIND BIOLOGICAL REALITY PHYSICAL REALITY

More Related