BRITEST – Best Route Innovative Technology Evaluation and Selection Techniques
Submitting Institution
University of ManchesterUnit of Assessment
Aeronautical, Mechanical, Chemical and Manufacturing EngineeringSummary Impact Type
TechnologicalResearch Subject Area(s)
Mathematical Sciences: Applied Mathematics
Information and Computing Sciences: Artificial Intelligence and Image Processing, Information Systems
Summary of the impact
BRITEST is a global leader in the development of innovative process
solutions for the chemical
processing sector with > £500m of value being realized since 2008.
Research in Manchester
(1997-2000) generated a set of novel tools and methodologies which analyse
chemical processes
to identify where and how process improvements could be made. BRITEST was
established in
2001 as a not-for-profit company to manage the technology transfer and
effective deployment of
these tools and methodologies into industry. Manchester holds the IP
arising from the underpinning
research and has granted an exclusive license to BRITEST for use and
exploitation of the toolkit.
Underpinning research
The impact relates to research carried out in collaboration with Imperial
College, University of
Leeds and industry between 1997 and 2009.
Key researchers at Manchester were:
Professor Paul Sharratt (1991 — 2008, Principal Investigator)
Dr Kevin Wall (1998 — 2011, Research Fellow)
Professor John Garside (1982 — 2004, Professor)
Professor Roger Davey (1991 — present, Professor)
Dr Naheed Sadr Kazemi (1997 — 2000, PDRA)
Dr Aruna Manipura (2008 — 2009, PDRA)
Dr. Jorge Arizmendi-Sánchez (2003 - 2007, PhD Student) , Dr. Tinoush
Sheikhzeinoddin (2005 — 2009, PhD Student).
The main aim of the research was to deliver a methodology, models and a
suite of decision
support tools designed to sustain and improve the new product development
(NPD) process in the
fine chemicals industry.
The research project aimed to
(a) halve the time to product launch,
(b) halve capital costs and
(c) substantially improve manufacturing flexibility.
The key findings were:
- That process tools could be used to help companies understand the
design of the chemical
process [1, 2].
- That the convenient capture and analysis of critical information, both
numerical and non-numerical, with the developed methodologies opened up clear, effective
communication channels
between the multi-disciplinary groups involved in the development and
operation of a complex
industrial process [3].
- That the early identification of processing options allows timely
development of experimental
programmes to evaluate the options and allows controlling phenomena (for
example, chemical
reaction rates, phases of matter and minimum data requirements) to be
reviewed by engineers and
chemists in a common language that will ultimately lead to processes
being scaled-up much more
easily [3].
The BRITEST toolkit was successfully used to develop multi-scale
approaches and performance
enhancement for chemical and pharmaceutical production. Further examples
of continued
research include:
- Using the BRITEST whole process design concept for high throughput
experimental design
[4,5]
- Developing a design strategy to adapt the process to the chemical
reaction (process
intensification) [6].
References to the research
The research was published in leading chemical engineering journals,
including Organic Process
Research & Development (American Chemical Society) and the
Chemical Engineering Journal.
Sharratt was awarded a Royal Academy of Engineering/EPSRC Chair in
Innovative Manufacturing
for the period of 2001-2006 based on the strength of his BRITEST research
work in support of
innovation in the pharmaceutical and chemical industries. This led to the
award of the
IChemE/AMEC award for Innovation and Excellence in SMEs in 2006.
Key Publications
1. Wall K, Sharratt PN, Sadr-Kazemi N and Borland JN (2000)
"Plant-independent Process
Representation", In: Sauro Pierucci (Ed.) Computer Aided Chemical
Engineering, Elsevier,
Volume 8, 721-726. DOI 10.1016/S1570-7946(00)80122-4
2. Wall K, Sharratt PN, Sadr-Kazemi N and Borland JN (2001)
"Plant-independent Process
Representation", Org Proc Res & Dev, 5 (4): 434-437 Jul-Aug
2001 DOI 10.1021/op010002j
3. Sharratt PN, Wall K and Borland JN (2003) "Generating innovative
process designs using
limited data", J. Chem Tech and Biotech, 78, 156-160 DOI 10.1002/jctb.718
Other Relevant Publications
4. Obenndip D.A. and Sharratt P.N. (2005) "Enhancing Fine Chemicals
Process Chemistry: A
Practical Approach", Chemical Engineering Research and Design,
83(6), 655-661. DOI
10.1205/cherd.04358
5. Obenndip D.A. and Sharratt P.N. (2006) "Towards an information-rich
process development —
part I: Interfacing experimentation with qualitative / semi quantitative
models", Org Proc Res &
Dev, 10 (3), pp430-440 DOI 10.1021/op050236t
6. Arizmendi-Sánchez, JA and Sharratt PN (2007) "Phenomena-based
modularisation of
chemical process models to approach intensive options", Chem Eng J,
135(1-2), 83-94 DOI
10.1016/j.cej.2007.02.017
Details of the impact
Context
Chemical processes are highly complex, multi-stage operations where
traditional thinking is
focused on the effective process design of each stage. The BRITEST tools
and methodologies that
resulted from the research are highly innovative in promoting a whole
process analysis approach,
with input from both scientists and engineers. This novel approach is
necessary to fully understand
the complexity of processes within the high-value manufacturing sector.
Pathways to Impact
The underpinning research was conducted in collaboration with industry
and the resultant tools and
methodologies continue to be effectively used across high value chemical
manufacturing sectors.
The active engagement of industry throughout the research and development
stage, and the
establishment of BRITEST Ltd in 2001 to provide an effective route to
market, has ensured that the
original research has gone from strength to strength with the full backing
of industry through
membership subscription and continuing in-kind support. Manchester holds
the IP arising from the
initial research and has granted an exclusive license for use and
exploitation of the tools and
methodologies to BRITEST Ltd. Further investment in BRITEST, via increased
membership and
collaborative research projects, has ensured the continued development and
expansion of the
toolkit over the last 12 years. BRITEST Ltd is a not-for profit global
organisation, owned and
directed by its members, both industrial (19 companies) and academic (5
institutions). Currently
the company has 8 staff and a turnover of £800k in 2012-13 [i].
Reach and Significance of Impact
Process design is fundamental to chemistry-using industries including
pharmaceuticals,
agrochemicals, electronics, food and consumer products generating an
estimated £195bn GVA
each year in the UK alone, with processing activity accounting for 40 % of
the product cost. The
BRITEST tools and methodologies enable companies to understand complex
process chemistry,
and develop innovative process solutions.
An intensifying focus on the environment and climate change is driving
industry to challenge the
sustainability of its manufacturing processes, to ensure that products are
produced in the most
sustainable manner. BRITEST is helping its members meet this challenge and
remains active in
the development and implementation of sustainable process design solutions
to deliver improved
process efficiency including energy savings, reduced waste and lower
solvent usage. Furthermore
products must meet strict government legalisation and Christine Moore, the
U.S. Food and Drug
Administration Acting Director of New Drug Quality Assessment, has
recognised BRITEST as one
approach for product understanding in the drive for quality and design as
companies "seek a
systematic process for the assessment, control, communication and review
of risks to the quality of
the drug product" [ii].
Members of BRITEST report significant benefits including increased
throughput, reduced capital
expenditure and improved asset utilisation. One member was considering
commissioning a new
plant but after evaluating the manufacturing process using BRITEST tools
& methodologies,
substantial improvements were made to the existing process and investment
in a new plant was no
longer considered necessary. In 2012 Mark A. Phillips, a Process Expert
with GSK, submitted
written evidence to the House of Commons Science and Technology Select
Committee, describing
BRITEST Ltd as "one of the most successful translations of research
from academia to the
development of tools and techniques within industry to improve the
introduction of new products in
the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors" [iii].
The reach of BRITEST encompasses the UK, Europe, the United States and
South East Asia with
a wide range of industrial sectors from mining and consumer goods to
pharmaceuticals. Examples
of industrial members are Pfizer, Johnson Matthey and Procter &
Gamble. Academic members
include Newcastle, Nottingham, Limerick and Purdue (USA). Sue Fleet,
BRITEST CEO, says "a
typical BRITEST process study realises a saving of £250k. With more than
2000 such studies
performed since 2008, BRITEST has delivered economic impact in excess of
£500m" [i]. Below
we provide several illustrative examples.
lllustrative Case Studies:
- Company A is an international organisation [text removed for
publication]. Over the last 5 years,
the company has used the BRITEST toolkit to evaluate and optimise their
chemical processes [text
removed for publication]. During this time "substantial benefits
have been achieved including, a
reduction in processing costs, improved yield, and reduced solvent
usage as well as significant
process optimisation benefits. In one particular process study, the
company [text removed for
publication] using the BRITEST tools to identify where the process
could be optimised. In
implementing changes identified through the study a reduction in cycle
time from 41 to 35 days
was achieved, yield was improved by 5% and a financial gain of £80k
per campaign1 resulted" [iv].
- Company B [text removed for publication] uses BRITEST tools &
methodologies to routinely
evaluate its [text removed for publication] development processes and
has been actively engaged
in the BRITEST innovation programme during this time. In 2011, the
company used the BRITEST
toolkit to address a problem they had been experiencing for some time on
[text removed for
publication]. The BRITEST study "helped them analyse the problem
from first principles and
generated an action list which ultimately identified the root cause of
the problem. A multi-disciplinary
approach using several of the BRITEST tools and methodologies enabled
the company
to find a permanent solution to the problem resulting in a GBP 500k
annual saving to the company"
[v].
- Company C [text removed for publication]. In 2012, it employed a
BRITEST study methodology
to evaluate an established production system they had been operating for
over 25 years. The
BRITEST tools enabled them "to gain a clear understanding of each
stage of the process and
identified ways in which they could optimise the whole process. The
resulting action plan and
laboratory trials enabled them to remove two process stages and
streamline the whole process
resulting in an improvement in product yield from 76 - 81%; a 60%
reduction in production cycle
time and a 15% reduction in production costs. The process optimisation
achieved as a result of the
BRITEST study has generated a value of £160k per production year"
[vi].
- Company D [text removed for publication]. Using the BRITEST tools and
methodology [text
removed for publication] has been able to deliver step-change advances
in manufacturing that has
enabled them to compete effectively in the global market. The company's
Managing Director states
that "use of the BRITEST tools and methodologies, together with our
active participation in the on-going
development of the toolkit, enables us to contribute to, and
benefit from, a sustainable,
competitive industry that offers better science and innovative
processes. A project undertaken
recently involved producing a new product for a new customer.
[text removed for publication].
Using the BRITEST study approach throughout, the company was able to
understand the process
better, identify the problems, discover the solutions and fully
optimise the process as it moved from
laboratory to pilot-plant and onto full scale production. In using the
BRITEST tools, the company
realised a 5% increase in product yield, a 10% increase in margin and
zero off-site disposal costs"
[vii].
Note: The identification of individual companies
referred to in this section, together with some of
the information relating to particular impact statements, has been
genericised in line with the
BRITEST Company Rules regarding information disclosure. The
identification and data relating to
each example given above can be audited and verified through BRITEST
under an appropriate
CDA should that be necessary.
Sources to corroborate the impact
[i] Letter from CEO BRITEST Limited corroborating factual information
presented in this case.
[ii] 17th International Process Development Conference. "FDA
Perspective on Quality by Design
(QbD) in Pharmaceutical Development." Presentation by U.S. Food and Drug
Administration
(Christine Moore) 19 May 2010
[iii] Written Evidence submitted to the Science and Technology Select
Committee Inquiry: Bridging
the "Valley of Death": improving the commercialisation of research. Quote
from Process expert,
GlaxoSmithKline (Mark A Phillips) February 2012
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmsctech/writev/valley/valley14.htm
[iv] Company A paper presented at BRITEST Members Day 20 October 2011.
"Tool-kit to success"
[v] Company B paper presented at BRITEST Members Day 20 October 2011. "Oh
No! It has all
gone horribly wrong (Using Britest tools to aid communication and problem
solving)"
[vi] Company C paper presented at BRITEST Members Day 25 October 2012.
"Challenge your
neurons to kill false ideas and generate value."
[vii] Company D paper presented at BRITEST Members Day 20 October 2011.
"It Smells Like
Money"
1 Campaign, in this context, refers to a set of batch production runs
carried out over a period of time (in this case 35 days).