Energymascon
Application · Process Optimization

Run the line where it should live.

Find and lock in the operating points that lift yield, cut waste, and lower energy per unit — using the data you already have, the engineering you already trust, and trials small enough to run without stopping production.

Operating envelope · Line CModelled
Yield % vs setpoint pairtemp · pressure
Temperature setpointPressure setpointtarget zone+ 4.8 pp yieldcurrent
Δ Temp
+4°C
Δ Pressure
−0.3 bar
Expected gain
+4.8 pp
Home·Solutions·Applications·Process Optimization
Four levers

The metrics worth optimising — and how the data sees them.

Lever 01
+6.2pp first-pass yield

Yield

First-pass yield, scrap, and rework — modelled to the parameters that move them.

Find the operating points that produce more good parts. Statistical process control on the metrics that matter, with the operating context to explain the variance — not just flag it.

First-pass yield · 12 weeks88.2% → 94.4%
Lever 02
−18% material waste

Waste

Material, energy, and time — bucketed by line, shift, and operating regime.

Every dollar of waste leaves a fingerprint in the data. Bucketed against the parameters that drive it, your team can see what to push on — and what to leave alone.

Material waste · before / after−18%
Before
After
Lever 03
−14% energy per unit

Energy

kWh per unit, by line and shift, audited to ISO 50001.

Tie every unit of energy to a product, a batch, and an operating regime. Benchmark lines against themselves, lines against lines, and shifts against shifts.

kWh per unit · by shift−14% avg
Lever 04
8h earlier detection

Quality drift

Catch the change before it shows up in the lab.

Process-side analytics see drift hours before the inspection report does. Detect, contain, and route to engineering — without the batch ever leaving the line.

SPC · spec driftcaught 8h before lab
What's actually moving the metric

Driver ranking that survives engineering scrutiny.

A correlation isn't a cause. We pair statistical attribution with engineering review so the variables you push on are the variables that actually move the outcome — not noise that happens to track it.

  • Driver ranking by partial dependency, not raw correlation
  • Operating-regime segmentation so seasonality isn't mistaken for cause
  • Engineering review of each candidate before it gets trialled
  • Sensitivity bands so the trial size is calibrated to the signal
Driver ranking · first-pass yield
Partial-dependency score · 0–1
Reactor temp setpoint
0.92+3.1 pp yield
Feed pressure
0.78+1.4 pp yield
Catalyst feed rate
0.64+1.1 pp yield
Recycle ratio
0.51−0.6 pp yield (rejected)
Ambient temp (uncontrolled)
0.42context only
Operator (no.)
0.18no signal
3 candidates approved for trial · 1 rejected on engineering reviewPhase 02 · Model
The method

Baseline · Model · Trial · Lock in.

Optimisation that respects the line. No year-long studies, no high-risk setpoint changes — small, reversible moves with measured impact, each one earning its place in the recipe.

PHASE 01

Baseline

Three weeks of clean operational data with the variables and outcomes the team agrees matter. No optimisation yet — just an honest picture of where the line lives today.

Outputs
Capability indices · current operating envelope · variance attribution
PHASE 02

Model

Engineering-aware models of the process. Setpoints, raw materials, ambient, and equipment state correlated to the outcomes that drive cost and quality.

Outputs
Driver ranking · setpoint sensitivities · operating-regime clustering
PHASE 03

Trial

Test-and-learn cycles run on the line with engineering oversight. Small, reversible setpoint moves with measured impact — not a year-long capex programme.

Outputs
Validated setpoint deltas · operator standard-work updates
PHASE 04

Lock in

New operating points written into recipes, standard work, and control limits. SPC rules updated; outcomes monitored continuously.

Outputs
Updated recipes · automated SPC · drift detection
The outcome

Better yield, less waste, lower energy — locked into the recipe.

+6.2pp
First-pass yield
−18%
Material waste
−14%
Energy per unit
12wk
From baseline to lock-in
Case Study · Anonymised

A continuous chemical line gained 6 points of yield from three setpoint moves.

Twelve weeks from baseline to lock-in. Three reversible setpoint trials, each measured for two production cycles. The third move was rejected on engineering review; the first two are now the recipe.

+6.2pp
First-pass yield
Locked into the recipe — sustained across 11 months.
−9.4%
Energy per tonne
Same product spec, lower kWh per unit.
12wk
Baseline → lock-in
From kickoff to standard work updated.
$2.1M
Annualised impact
Validated against pre-trial baseline.
Book a demo

Move the metric. Lock in the move.

A 30-minute working session with a process engineer — bring one line and one outcome, and we'll show you what the four-phase method looks like for it.