Skip to main content

Combined Feedforward/Feedback Control of an Integrated Continuous Granulation Process

Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation volume 14, pages 259–285 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Continuous manufacturing offers shorter processing times and increased product quality assurance, among several other advantages. This makes it an ever-growing interest among pharmaceutical companies. A suitable efficient control system is however desired for continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing to achieve a consistent predefined end product quality.

Methods

In order to control product quality more accurately, the effects of input disturbances need to be proactively mitigated. Therefore, it is desired that a combined feedforward/feedback control system integrated with suitable process analytical technology (PAT) be implemented over a traditional feedback-only control system. The feedforward controller measures and takes corrective actions for disturbances proactively before they affect the process and thereby product quality. The feedback controller considers the real-time deviation of control variable from a pre-specified set point and keeps it at a minimum possible value. The deviation of a control variable from the set point could be due to both measurable and unmeasurable disturbances.

Results

In this work, a combined control strategy has been developed for a continuous twin screw wet granulation (WG) process. An integrated flowsheet model was developed and simulated in order to evaluate the effect of control loops on critical quality attributes (CQAs). Different strategies of manipulation were evaluated and the best strategy was identified.

Conclusions

In silico study on the combined feedforward/feedback control strategy and feedback-only control strategy demonstrates that the combined loop results in diminished variability of the CQAs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26
Fig. 27
Fig. 28
Fig. 29
Fig. 30
Fig. 31
Fig. 32
Fig. 33
Fig. 34
Fig. 35

References

  1. Schaber SD, Gergiorgis DI, Ramachandran R, Evans JMB, Barton PI, Trout BL. Economic analysis of integrated continuous and batch pharmaceutical manufacturing: a case study. Ind Eng Chem. 2011;50:10083–92. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie2006752.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Department of Health and Human Services. Pharmaceutical CGMPs for the 21st century—a risk based approach. United States Food and Drug Administration: Silver Spring, Maryland. 2004. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/Manufacturing/QuestionsandAnswersonCurrentGoodManufacturingPracticescGMPforDrugs/UCM176374.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2016.

  3. Department of Health and Human Services. Advancement of Emerging Technology Applications to Modernize the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Base Guidance for Industry. United States Food and Drug Administration: Silver Spring, Maryland. 2015. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM478821.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2016.

  4. Myerson AS, Krumme M, Nasr M, Thomas H, Braatz RD. Control systems engineering in continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing. May 20–21, 2014 continuous manufacturing symposium. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104:832–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.24311.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Muteki K, Swaminathan V, Sekulic SS, Reid GL. Feed-forward process control strategy for pharmaceutical tablet manufacture using latent variable modeling and optimization technologies. IFAC Proceedings Volumes. 2012;45(15):51–6. https://doi.org/10.3182/20120710-4-SG-2026.00076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bardin M, Knight PC, Seville JPK. On control of particle size distribution in granulation using high-shear mixers. Powder Technol. 2004;140(3):169–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2004.03.003.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Burggraeve A, Silva AFT, Kerkhof TVD, Hellings M, Vervaet C, Remon JP, et al. Development of a fluid bed granulation process control strategy based on real-time process and product measurements. Talanta. 2012;100:293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2012.07.054.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanders CFW, Hounslow MJ, Doyle FJ. Identification of models for control of wet granulation. Powder Technol. 2009;188(3):255–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2008.05.005.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Singh R, Muzzio FJ, Ierapetritou M, Ramachandran R. A combined feed-forward/feed-back control system for a QbD-based continuous tablet manufacturing process. PRO. 2015;3(2):339–56. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr3020339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Singh R, Velazquez C, Sahay A, Karry KM, Muzzio FJ, Ierapetritou MG, et al. Advanced control of continuous pharmaceutical tablet manufacturing processes. Process Simulation and Data Modeling in Solid Oral Drug Development and Manufacture. 2016:191–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2996-2_7.

  11. Singh Ravendra BD, Chaudhary A, Sen M, Ierapetritou M, Ramachandran R. Closed-loop feedback control of a continuous pharmaceutical tablet manufacturing process via wet granulation. J Pharm Innov. 2014;9:16–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-014-9170-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance for Industry PAT-A Framework for Innovative Pharmaceutical Development, Manufacturing, and Quality Assurance. United States Food and Drug Administration: Silver Spring, Maryland. 2004. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidances/ucm070305.pdf . Accessed 09 Feb 2017.

  13. Vanarase AU, Alcalà M, Jerez Rozo JI, Muzzio FJ, Romañach RJ. Real-time monitoring of drug concentration in a continuous powder mixing process using NIR spectroscopy. Chem Eng Sci. 2010;65(21):5728–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2010.01.036.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Singh R, Sahay A, Karry KM, Muzzio F, Ierapetritou M, Ramachandran R. Implementation of an advanced hybrid MPC–PID control system using PAT tools into a direct compaction continuous pharmaceutical tablet manufacturing pilot plant. Int J Pharm. 2014;473(1):38–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2014.06.045.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Singh R, Román-Ospino AD, Romañach RJ, Ierapetritou M, Ramachandran R. Real time monitoring of powder blend bulk density for coupled feed-forward/feed-back control of a continuous direct compaction tablet manufacturing process. Int J Pharm. 2015;495(1):612–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2015.09.029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boukouvala F, Chaudhury A, Sen M, Zhou R, Mioduszewski L, Ierapetritou MG, et al. Computer-aided flowsheet simulation of a pharmaceutical tablet manufacturing process incorporating wet granulation. J Pharm Innov. 2013;8(1):11–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-012-9143-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Boukouvala F, Niotis V, Ramachandran R, Muzzio FJ, Ierapetritou MG. An integrated approach for dynamic flowsheet modeling and sensitivity analysis of a continuous tablet manufacturing process. Comput Chem Eng. 2012;42:30–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2012.02.015.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Boukouvala F, Ramachandran R, Vanarase A, Muzzio FJ, Ierapetritou MG. Computer aided design and analysis of continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 201129;216–220; doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53711-9.50044-4, 2011.

  19. Escotet-Espinoza M, Rogers A, Muzzio F, Ierapetritou M. Modeling of residence time distribution in continuous solid oral dose pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. AIChE annual meeting, Atlanta, GA. 20 2014.

  20. Kumar A, Vercruysse J, Vanhoorne V, Toiviainen M, Panouillot PE, Juuti M, et al. Conceptual framework for model-based analysis of residence time distribution in twin-screw granulation. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2015;71:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2015.02.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Marlin TE. Process control: designing processes and control systems for dynamic performance. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill; 2000.

  22. Coughanowr DR, LeBlanc SE. Process systems analysis and control. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Inc; 2009.

  23. Román-Ospino AD, Singh R, Ierapetritou M, Ramachandran R, Méndez R, Ortega-Zuñiga C, et al. Near infrared spectroscopic calibration models for real time monitoring of powder density. Int J Pharm. 2016;512(1):61–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2016.08.029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kremer DM, Hancock BC. Process simulation in the pharmaceutical industry: a review of some basic physical models. J Pharm Sci. 2006;95(3):517–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.20583.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Haas NT, Ierapetritou M, Singh R. Advanced model predictive feedforward/feedback control of a tablet press. J Pharm Innov. 2017;12(2):110–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-017-9276-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work is supported by Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and the National Science Foundation Engineering Research Center on Structured Organic Particulate Systems, through Grant NSF-ECC 0540855.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering Research Center for Structured Organic Particulate Systems (C-SOPS), Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA

    Glinka Cathy Pereira, Shashank Venkat Muddu, Andrés David Román-Ospino, Fernando J. Muzzio, Marianthi Ierapetritou, Rohit Ramachandran & Ravendra Singh

  2. Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK), King of Prussia, PA, 19406, USA

    Don Clancy, Benoit Igne & Christian Airiau

Authors
  1. Glinka Cathy Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shashank Venkat Muddu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrés David Román-Ospino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Don Clancy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benoit Igne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christian Airiau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Fernando J. Muzzio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Marianthi Ierapetritou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Rohit Ramachandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ravendra Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ravendra Singh.

Appendices

Appendix

Feedforward Model

The feedforward controller model was developed in MATLAB workspace and Simulink. The integrated flowsheet model developed in gPROMS was converted to an integrated flowsheet model in Simulink. Transfer function models were developed from data generated by the gPROMS model. These models were developed in System Identification Toolbox and the best fit model was selected. The pole-zero plot and bode diagrams for these transfer functions were also developed to ensure that the transfer functions were stable. These transfer function models describe the various unit operations in the flowsheet. The flowsheet transfer function model is described in Fig. 36.

Fig 36
figure 36

Integrated flowsheet model simulated in Simulink (open loop)

Full size image

The above transfer function model was simplified because during implementation a simplified model for the entire process would be required. The simplified process model which also represents the ideal case was developed using the data generated by the Simulink model described in Fig. 36. The feedforward controller was then developed using the disturbance model and the process model given in Fig. 37. The feedforward controller transfer function is achieved by equating the characteristic equation to zero. The general form of that is given in Eq. 10. Both the disturbance transfer function (Gd) and process transfer function (Gp) are specific to a particular process and material and would change if any changes are made to the process or the materials.

$$ {G}_{\mathrm{FF}}=-\frac{G_{\mathrm{d}}}{G_{\mathrm{p}}} $$
(10)
Fig. 37
figure 37

Integrated flowsheet with combined feedforward/feedback control in Simulink

Full size image

Appendix B: Nomenclature

Abbreviations
 APAP Acetyl-para-aminophenol
 API Active pharmaceutical ingredient
 CPM Continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing
 CPP Critical process parameter
 CQA Critical quality attribute
 CSTR Continuously stirred tank reactor
 CU Content uniformity
 D2R Duration to reject
 HPMC Hypromellose
 IAE Integral of absolute error
 ISE Integral of square of error
 ITAE Integral of time absolute error
 LOD Loss on drying
 L/S Liquid to solid
 M2P Magnitude to product
 MgSt Magnesium stearate
 MPC Model predictive control
 MRT Mean residence time
 MSC Multiplicative scattering correction
 NaStGly Sodium starch glycolate
 NIR Near infrared
 PAT Process analytical technology
 PFR Plug flow reactor
 PID Proportional integral derivative
 PLS Partial least squares
 QbD Quality by design
 RMSE Root mean square error
 RMSEP Root mean square error of prediction
 RSEP Relative standard error of prediction
 RSD Relative standard deviation
 RTD Residence time distribution
 SMCC Silicified microcrystalline cellulose
 SP Set point
 SSE Sum of squared errors
 T2P Time to product
 TSG Twin screw granulator
 WG Wet granulation
Symbol Variable
 Gd(s) Disturbance transfer function model
 Gp(s) Process transfer function model
 Gc Controller transfer function model
 P Proportional gain
 I Integral time constant
 D Derivative time constant
Subscript Description
 d Disturbance
 p Process
 c Controller
 1,2,3,4 Process or controller numbers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pereira, G.C., Muddu, S.V., Román-Ospino, A.D. et al. Combined Feedforward/Feedback Control of an Integrated Continuous Granulation Process. J Pharm Innov 14, 259–285 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-018-9347-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-018-9347-8

Keywords

  • Continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing
  • Feedforward control
  • Feedback control
  • Continuous twin screw granulator (TSG)
  • Process analytical technology