Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying a Loss-in-Weight Feeder Design Space Based on Performance and Material Properties

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Powder properties, such as density and adhesion, can cause large variability in the flow rate of ingredients fed from feeders, which can propagate through the system. Knowing an ideal range of operation and correlating powder properties to process performance can result in faster optimization of performance, which saves time and money.

Method

A K-Tron KT-20 pharmaceutical loss-in-weight feeder was evaluated with multiple screw types, feed rates, and materials. The material was dispensed onto a catch scale, recording mass versus time, and analyzed for relative standard deviation and deviation from the setpoint. The materials used in this work were characterized by particle size, packing, and flow properties.

Results

Linear relationships between the feeder’s throughput capacity and material bulk density were identified for four different types of screws. Analyzing the feeder data resulted in a region where the RSD was at a minimum across a range of screw speeds. This was identified between 20–90% screw speed for coarse concave, fine concave, and coarse auger screws and 40–90% screw speed for fine auger screws.

Conclusion

An optimal range of operation for K-Tron KT20 feeders was identified, as well as a linear correlation between material conditioned bulk density and maximum throughput for a given material and screw type. Using both the predictable maximum throughput and the optimal screw range, an optimal design space has been identified that will save development time and money.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wilson DH, Bullivant K W, Loss-in-weight gravimetric feeder. Google Patents: 1986.

  2. Hopkins M. Loss in weight feeder systems. Measurement and Control. 2006;39(8):237–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Weinekötter R, Reh L. Continuous mixing of fine particles. Part Part Syst Charact. 1995;12(1):46–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Engisch W, Ierapetritou M, Muzzio F. Hopper refill of loss-in-weight feeding equipment. Salt Lake City, UT, USA: Proceedings of the 2010 AIChE Annual Meeting; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Plumb K. Continuous processing in the pharmaceutical industry: changing the mindset. Chem Eng Res Des. 2005;83(6):730–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schaber SD, Gerogiorgis DI, Ramachandran R, Evans JM, Barton PI, Trout BL. Economic analysis of integrated continuous and batch pharmaceutical manufacturing: a case study. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2011;50(17):10083–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Leuenberger H. New trends in the production of pharmaceutical granules: batch versus continuous processing. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2001;52(3):289–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Roberge DM, Zimmermann B, Rainone F, Gottsponer M, Eyholzer M, Kockmann N. Microreactor technology and continuous processes in the fine chemical and pharmaceutical industry: is the revolution underway? Org Process Res Dev. 2008;12(5):905–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Editors PT, FDA approves tablet production on Janssen continuous manufacturing line. PharmTech.com 2016. Accessed 8 April 2016.

  10. Food Administration D. Guidance for industry PAT—a framework for innovative pharmaceutical development, manufacturing, and quality assurance. Rockville, MD: DHHS; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lawrence XY. Pharmaceutical quality by design: product and process development, understanding, and control. Pharm Res. 2008;25(4):781–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rathore AS. Roadmap for implementation of quality by design (QbD) for biotechnology products. Trends Biotechnol. 2009;27(9):546–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Urquhart L. Regulatory watch: FDA new drug approvals in Q1 2018. Nat Publ Group. 2018;17(5):309.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee S. Current FDA perspective for continuous manufacturing. Cambridge, Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika: 2nd International Symposium on Continuous Manufacturing of Pharmaceuticals; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Walker N, EMA approves continuous manufacture of prezista. Pharma’s Almanac 2017, PAO-M07-17-NI-002.

  16. 2016 ISPE Continous manufacturing conference summary. 2017.

  17. Johnson NR, System for precisely controlling discharge rates of loss-in-weight feeder systems. Google Patents 1992.

  18. Aalto P; Björklund J-P, Loss-in-weight feeder control. Google Patents 2002.

  19. Kehlenbeck V, Sommer K. Possibilities to improve the short-term dosing constancy of volumetric feeders. Powder Technol. 2003;138(1):51–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Tardos GI, Lu Q. Precision dosing of powders by vibratory and screw feeders: an experimental study. Adv Powder Technol. 1996;7(1):51–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Engisch WE, Muzzio FJ. Method for characterization of loss-in-weight feeder equipment. Powder Technol. 2012;228:395–403.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Engisch WE, Muzzio FJ. Feedrate deviations caused by hopper refill of loss-in-weight feeders. Powder Technol. 2015;283:389–400.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Cordts E, Steckel H. Capabilities and limitations of using powder rheology and permeability to predict dry powder inhaler performance. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2012;82(2):417–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fu X, Huck D, Makein L, Armstrong B, Willen U, Freeman T. Effect of particle shape and size on flow properties of lactose powders. Particuology. 2012;10(2):203–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bharadwaj R, Ketterhagen WR, Hancock BC. Discrete element simulation study of a Freeman powder rheometer. Chem Eng Sci. 2010;65(21):5747–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang Z, Scicolone JV, Gurumuthy L, Davé RN. Flow and bulk density enhancements of pharmaceutical powders using a conical screen mill: a continuous dry coating device. Chem Eng Sci. 2015;125:209–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Huang Z, Scicolone JV, Han X, Davé RN. Improved blend and tablet properties of fine pharmaceutical powders via dry particle coating. Int J Pharm. 2015;478(2):447–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Scicolone JV, Metzger M, Koynov S, Anderson K, Takhistov P, Glasser BJ, et al. Effect of liquid addition on the bulk and flow properties of fine and coarse glass beads. AICHE J. 2016;62(3):648–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang Y, Koynov S, Glasser BJ, Muzzio FJ. A method to analyze shear cell data of powders measured under different initial consolidation stresses. Powder Technol. 2016;294:105–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Freeman R. Measuring the flow properties of consolidated, conditioned and aerated powders—a comparative study using a powder rheometer and a rotational shear cell. Powder Technol. 2007;174(1):25–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Carson JW, Wilms H. Development of an international standard for shear testing. Powder Technol. 2006;167(1):1–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Peschl I. New rotational shear-testing technique. J Powder Bulk Solids Technol. 1977;1(3):55.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schwedes J, Schulze D. Measurement of flow properties of bulk solids. Powder Technol. 1990;61(1):59–68.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Schmitt R, Feise H. Influence of tester geometry, speed and procedure on the results from a ring shear tester. Part Part Syst Charact: Measurement and Description of Particle Properties and Behavior in Powders and Other Disperse Systems. 2004;21(5):403–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Nikita Soni, Glinka Pereira, Kien Chau, Lan Le, and Nikhita Shetty for the assistance in this work.

Funding

The research was financially supported by the Janssen Ortho LLC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA

    Tianyi Li, James V. Scicolone & Fernando J. Muzzio

  2. Advanced Technologies Center of Excellence, Janssen Supply Chain, Gurabo, PR, USA

    Eric Sanchez

Authors
  1. Tianyi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James V. Scicolone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fernando J. Muzzio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James V. Scicolone.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, T., Scicolone, J.V., Sanchez, E. et al. Identifying a Loss-in-Weight Feeder Design Space Based on Performance and Material Properties. J Pharm Innov 15, 482–495 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-019-09394-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-019-09394-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation