Chemical Non-Destructive Evaluation at the Center for Process Analytical Chemistry
The chemical discipline of Process Analytical Chemistry focuses on new sensors and analyzers capable of acquiring quantitative chemical information from a process via online, in-line and non-invasive approaches. This is opposed to off-line or at-line methods that lead to sampling problems, time delays, and in general, an inability to control and optimize chemical processes. The Center for Process Analytical Chemistry (CPAC) at the University of Washington has long recognized that the preferred approach to process analysis is non-invasive and has pioneered a variety of process analyzers and associated multivariate data analysis tools to exploit the relatively few physical and chemical phenomena available to the non-invasive approach. This work is similar to research at the Center for Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) except that the CPAC emphasis is on quantitative chemical information. Both centers are Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers initiated by grants from the National Science Foundation. This report will include topics on non-invasive analysis, or chemical NDE, selected from the CPAC research program. Additionally, the chosen topics represent a progression from the standard spectral measurements to more complex combinations of both spectral and spatial information. The combination of spectral and spatial domains has been, in part, facilitated by the development of chemometric techniques geared towards handling complex multidimensional data sets. The first topic involves extracting both chemical and physical information from infrared emission (IRE) spectra using multivariate methods from the field of chemometrics.
KeywordsPartial Little Square Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Signal Infrared Emission Pattern Recognition Method Chemometric Technique
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.R. J. Pell, “Chemometrics and Infrared Emission Spectroscopy for Remote Analysis”, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Washington, 1990.Google Scholar
- 3.C. L. Putzig, M. A. Leugers, M. L. McKelvy, G. E. Mitchell, R. A. Nyquist, R. R. Papenfuss, and L. Yurga, Anal. Chem. 66, 26R (1994).Google Scholar
- 4.C. L. Putzig, M. A. Leugers, M. L. McKelvy, G. E. Mitchell, R. A. Nyquist, R. R. Papenfuss, and L. Yurga, Anal. Chem. 64, 270R (1992).Google Scholar
- 12.J. B. Callis, personal communication with J. B. Callis (1995).Google Scholar
- 13.W. H. A. M. van den Broek, J. C. A. Kraak, D. Wienke, W. J. Meissen, and L. Buydens, 4th Scandanavian Symposium on Chemometrics, Lund, Sweden June 12–16 (1995).Google Scholar
- 14.P. Cooke, Anal. Chem. 66, 558R (1994).Google Scholar
- 19.Proc. Int. Symp. on Remote Sensing of the Environment, San Francisco, 1–4 April 1985.Google Scholar
- 26.P. Williams and K. Norris, Near-infrared Technology in the Agricultural and Food Industries (American Association of Cereal Chemists, 1987).Google Scholar
- 27.J. P. Smith, US Patent No. 5,311,131 (10 May 1994).Google Scholar
- 28.B. R. Kowalski and B. J. Reilly, J. Phys. Chem. 75, 140 (1971).Google Scholar
- 29.M. A. Sharaf, D. L. Illman, and B. R. Kowalski, Chemometrics (John Wiley and Sons, 1986).Google Scholar
- 31.J. P. Smith and J. E. Koch, in Supplement to Radiology, Vol. 193(P) p. 479 (1994).Google Scholar