Jump to content

DOW Experimental Design

From mintOC
DOW Experimental Design
State dimension: 1
Differential states: 11
Discrete control functions: 2
Path constraints: 4
Interior point equalities: 11


The DOW Experimental Design problem models the OED problem for the parameter estimation problem formulated by the DOW Chemical Co. in 1981. The following formulation is taken from [1].

Chemical background

The chemical species are disguised for proprietary reasons and the desired reaction is given by HA+2BMAB+HBMH, where AB is the desired product. The reactions are described as follows:

Slow Kinetic Reactions:

M+BMk1k1MBMA+BMk2ABMM+ABk3k3ABM

Acid-Base Reactions:

MBMHK1MBM+H+HAK2A+H+HABMK3ABM+H+

In order to devise a model to account for these reactions, it is first necessary to distinguish between the overall concentration of a species and the concentration of its neutral form. Overall concentrations are defined for three components based on neutral and ionic species

[HBMH]=[(MBMH)N]+[MBM][HA]=[(HA)N]+[A][HABM]=[(HABM)N]+[ABM]

Here [ ] denotes the concentration of the species in mol/kg. By assuming the rapid acid-base reactions are at equilibrium, the equilibrium constants K1,K2,K3 can be defined as

K1=[MBM][H+][(MBMH)N]K2=[A][H+][(HA)N]K3=[ABM][H+][(HABM)N]

The anionic species may then be represented by

[MBM]=K1[MBMH]K1+[H+](a)[A]=K2[HA]K2+[H+](b)[ABM]=K3[HABM]K3+[H+](c)

Material balance equations for the three reactants in the slow kinetic reactions yield:

d[M]dt=k1[M][BM]+k1[MBM]k3[M][AB]+k1[ABM](d)d[BM]dt=k1[M][BM]+k1[MBM]k2[A][BM](e)d[AB]dt=k3[M][AB]+k3[ABM](f)

From stoichiometry, rate expressions can also be written for the total species:

d[MBMH]dt=k1[M][BM]k1[MBM](g)d[HA]dt=k2[A][BM](h)d[HABM]dt=k2[A][BM]+k3[M][AB]k3[ABM](i)

An electroneutrality constraint gives the hydrogen ion concentration [H+] as

[H+]+[Q+]=[M]+[MBM]+[A]+[ABM](j)

Based on similarities of reacting species, we assume

k3=k1,k3=12k1

With these assumptions, the three rate constants k1,k2 and k1 must be estimated. Each of these can be fitted with two adjustable model parameters, assuming an Arrhenius temperature dependence. That is

ki=αiexp(Ei/(RT)),i{1,1,2}

Here R1.98720425864083 cal/(Kmol) is the gas constant and T is the reaction temperature in Kelvins. The parameters αi, given in mol/(kgh), represent the pre-exponential factors and the Ei, with unit cal/mol, are the activation energies.

Mathematical formulation

The chemical processes (a)(j) can be expressed mathematically as six differential equations and four algebraic equations:

y˙1=k2y8y2(1),(h)y˙2=k1y6y2+k1y10k2y8y2(2),(e)y˙3=k2y8y2+k1y6y412k1y9(3),(i)y˙4=k1y6y4+12k1y9(4),(f)y˙5=k1y6y2k1y10(5),(g)y˙6=k1(y6y2+y6y4)+k1(y10+12y9)(6),(d)y7=[Q+]+y6+y8+y9+y10(7),(j)y8=θ8y1θ8+y7(8),(b)y9=θ9y3θ9+y7(9),(c)y10=θ7y5θ7+y7(10),(a)

Here the letters in parentheses stand for the corresponding chemical process and the quantity [Q+]=0.0131 is a constant during the reaction. The nine parameters form the vector

θ=(α1,E1,α2,E2,α1,E1,K1,K2,K3)

The predicted concentrations form the vector

y=(HA,BM,HABM,AB,MBMH,M,H+,A,ABM,MBM)

Let fk() denote the right hand side of equation (k) for k=1,,6.

The right hand sides of (1)(10) are summarized as the vector-valued function f. Moreover, let

fy,m,n()=fm()yn,m,n{1,,10}fθ,m,n()=fm()θn,m{1,,10}; n{1,,9}

Parameters

The initial parameter estimates are:

α1 2.01013 mol/(kgh)
α2 2.01013 mol/(kgh)
α1 4.31015 mol/(kgh)
E1 2.0104 cal/mol
E2 2.0104 cal/mol
E1 2.0104 cal/mol
K1 1.01017 mol/kg
K2 1.01011 mol/kg
K3 1.01017 mol/kg

Note that for the calculations all temperatures given in C have to be rescaled to K by adding 273.15.

There are three datasets for different temperatures T, with corresponding starting values

40C 67C 100C
y1(0) 1.7066 1.6749 1.5608
y2(0) 8.32 8.2262 8.3546
y3(0) 0.01 0.0104 0.0082
y4(0) 0 0.0017 0.0086

The initial model conditions in addition to those given in the data sets are:

y5=0y6=[Q+]y7=12(K2+K22+4K2y1(0))y8=y7y9=0y10=0

To reduce the intercorrelation between the parameters in the rate constants, we apply the following reparametrization (cf. [4].):

ki=αiexp(EiRT)=k0,iexp(EiR(1T1T0)),i=1,2,1

in which k0,i=αiexp(EiRT0). The reference temperature in T0 is chosen as the average over all performed experiments, i.e., T0=69C. Additionally, we add a logarithmic transformation, which gives rise to the following transformed starting values:

lnk0,1 1.194
lnk0,2 1.194
lnk0,1 6.565
E1 2.0104
E2 2.0104
E1 2.0104
lnK1 34.54
lnK2 25.33
lnK3 39.14

Optimal Experimental Design Problem

To be specified.

We are interested in when to measure (with an upper bound Mi on the measuring time for each observable). We define

fy()10×10 with (fy)i,j=fy,i,j,fθ()10×9 with (fθ)i,j=fθ,i,j

In this approach, we add the so-called sensitivities G=dy/dθ. For the differential equations this means

G˙(t)=fy(y(t),θ)G(t)+fθ(y(t),θ),G(0)=y(0)θ

Now we formulate the OED problem as described in [2].

miny,G,F,z,wtrace(F1(tf))subject toy˙(t)=f(y(t),θ)G˙(t)=fy(y(t),θ)G(t)+fθ(y(t),θ)F˙(t)=i=1nowi(t)(hyi(y(t))G(t))T(hyi(y(t))G(t))z˙(t)=w(t),y(0)=y0G(0)=y(0)θF(0)=0,z(0)=0w(t)𝒲zi(tf)Mi

Here h:10no is the observed function. The evolution of the symmetric matrix F:[0,tf]9×9 is given by the weighted sum of observability Gramians hyi(y(t))G(t), i=1,,no for each observed function of states. The weights wi(t){0,1}, i=1,,no are the (binary) sampling decisions, where wi(t)=1 denotes the decision to perform a measurement at time t.

Miscellaneous and Further Reading

To be specified.

References

[1] "Nonlinear Parameter Estimation: a Case Study Comparison" by L. T. Biegler and J. J. Damiano
[2] "Optimal Experimental Design for Universal Differential Equations" by C. Plate, C.J. Martensen and S. Sager
[3] "Parameter estimation in nonlinear systems" by W.J.H. Stortelder
[4] "Parameter Estimation in Nonlinear Dynamical Systems" by Morten Rode Kristensen