Int. J. Chem. Sci.

: 14(3), 2016, 1621-1632

ISSN 0972-768X
www.sadgurupublications.com

SIMULATION ANALYSIS OF FULLY THERMALLY

COUPLED DISTILLATION COLUMN
ASMITA PRAVIN PATIL* and S. M. JADHAV

Chemical Engineering Department, Bharati Vidyapeeth University,

College of Engineering, PUNE (M.S.) INDIA

ABSTRACT
Distillation is most important separation system which requires more energy to separation of
multi-component system. Fully thermally coupled distillation system (FTCDS) requires less energy than
other distillation system. In this study, three ternary mixtures are studied. FTCDS, conventional
sequencing is simulated by using ASPEN PLUS with different parameters analysis. For those three
mixtures, FTCDS and conventional sequencing methods energy consumption comparison studied.

Keywords: Fully thermally, Coupled distillation column, Design, Aspen plus.

INTRODUCTION

Distillation is one of the most important separation technologies. Distillation is most

commonly used in chemical industries. It requires significant amount of energy. In all over
world, 95% distillation is used for the separation. Whereas distillation itself consumes 3% of
the world energy1. Distillation can be used for binary or multi-component mixture; however
the implementation of energy saving solution is often required. Different techniques are used
for energy saving2. The use of complex column like side stripper, side rectifier, thermally
coupled columns reduces the overall heat duties. Divided wall distillation column (DWC) is
also heat integrated system. In this configuration, use of heat exchangers are reduced.

Different configuration is used for multi-component separation. Numbers of

conventional column are used. For this distillation, (n-1) columns, 2(n-1) condenser and
reboiler are required for n-components separation3. Two methods are used for this
configuration: (1) Direct sequencing and (2) indirect sequencing.

In direct sequencing method (Fig. 1a) for ternary component mixture first, of all the
________________________________________
*
Author for correspondence; E-mail: [email protected]
1622 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

light component is separated in first column and heavy components are passed to the second
column to separate. In indirect sequencing method (Fig. 1b) for ternary component mixture
the heavy component is separated first and then light components are remixed with each
other and that mixture is passed to the second column for separation4. For multi-component
separation, fully thermally coupled columns are used. In that Petlyuk column and DWC are
involved. Petlyuk column is invented in 1965 by Petlyuk and his coworkers. In this column,
two columns are interconnected with each other, in which vapor and liquid are exchanged
between two columns. For example, if ternary system ABC is separated in to binary
separation in first column AB in the top and BC in the bottom, AB fed to the top of the
second column as a vapor and from same place liquid AB is given to first column which is
prefractionator column as a reflux. Similarly, liquid BC is fed to the bottom of the second
column and from same place vapor is given to the prefractionator column as boil-up. This
connection eliminates the reboiler and condenser for the prefractionator column5, (Fig. 2).
Pressure at the top part of the main column is lower than the top part of the prefractionator
column and higher pressure at the bottom part of the main column than the prefractionator
bottom part.

Fig. 1: Conventional column sequencing (a) direct sequencing (b) indirect sequencing

Fig. 2: Fully thermally coupled column-Petlyuk column

Int. J. Chem. Sci.: 14(3), 2016 1623

DWC was first invented by R. O. Wright6 for general purpose. DWCs first industrial
application was used by BASF SE (1985). Up till 2010 it was recognized more than 100
DWC applications7. Distillation column with one vertical partition wall welded to the
column wall, which is generally known as a dividing wall column (DWC), Fig. 3. In DWC
nearly about 30% of energy savings are done compared to the direct and indirect sequencing
columns. In DWC unnecessary mixing is avoided. The main advantage of DWC is to be
used only one reboiler and one condenser. Proving it requires less capital cost and smaller
footprints. Further applications and potentials are gained by recently introduced non welded
technologies, which intensify more columns into one shell.

Fig. 3: DWC

Further applications and potentials are gained by recently introduced non welded
technologies, which intensify more columns into one shell. DWC required less plot area so
that shorter piping and electrical runs, a smaller storm runoff system, therefore heat loss is
negligible. DWC is attractive not only for three component mixture also number of
component mixture. DWC column is thermally equivalent to the Petlyuk column. Petlyuk
column can be arranged in different column structure. In this structure composition, flow,
temperature is same4,8. For DWC, there is no separate model available in Aspen Plus. DWC
is useful for separation in which production of detergents, aromatics, refining, hydro
processing, reforming operation, etc. Comparatively DWC is more complex than
conventional distillation column. For packed DWC Montz had patent in 1993 and for tray
column in 2002.
Design drocedure for DWC using ASPEN PLUS

Fully thermally coupled distillation, columns are designed by using simulation

results. For that shortcut simulation method is used for the initial estimation for the rigorous
simulation. In short cut design method, Fenske-Underwood-Gilliland equations are used. By
1624 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

using Fenske equation minimum number of theoretical stages at total reflux was estimated;
by using Underwood equation finite number of theoretical stages at minimum reflux. Feed
stage is estimated by using Kirkbride equation9.
Shortcut distillation

Three shortcut columns are shown in the Fig. 4. Which is nearly equivalent to the
fully thermally column distillation system (FTCDS). Shortcut column gives the necessary
estimation for rigorous simulation. Column B1 is equivalent to prefractionator column in
FTCDS and combination of column B2 and B3 are equivalent to main column. B2 bottom
purity and B3 top purity should be same then can be added these two streams in to one and
get flow for the side stream. In short cut distillation from first column vapor are passed to
second column from the top of the first and liquid passes to the third column from the
bottom of the first column. First column condenser is partial condenser and distillate is vapor
stream. These are saturated vapor and saturated liquid10.

Fig. 4: Three shortcut column for simulation

DWC column is divided into 4 sections. Prefractionator section for feed mixture is
equal to the first column (B1). Top section that is equal to the rectifying section of the
second column (B2) and bottom section of the DWC is equal to stripping section of the third
column (B3). Dividing wall section is the addition of the stripping section of the second
column (B2) and rectifying section of the third column (B3). Side stream is the combination
of the second and third column bottom and distillate, respectively11.

DWC is equivalent to the Petlyuk column. In that prefractionator column is

prefractionator side of DWC and main side is equal to the main column. Liquid and vapor
recycle streams of Petlyuk column are liquid split and vapor split in the DWC, which are
Int. J. Chem. Sci.: 14(3), 2016 1625

located at top and bottom side of the dividing wall, respectively12. Liquid split of the DWC
is depends on the hydraulics of the column internals and vapor split depends on the location
of the wall and pressure drop of the dividing section13.
Rigorous simulation

In ASPEN PLUS, DWC or Petlyuk configurations are not available in the unit
operation libraries so that DWC is consider as the interconnecting of two columns with
thermally coupling. For FTCDS simulation initial guesses were used, which given by
shortcut distillation process.

Fig. 5: Fully thermally coupled distillation system

First open the new simulation sheet and add the components, which involved in the
process and choose thermodynamic model in base method. Then draw flow sheet for the
FTCDS. In that first column is absorber (B1) from RadFrac model because that
prefractionator column does not have reboiler and condenser. Then draw second column as
distillation column (B2). Connect these two columns as shown in below Fig. 5. Give feed to
B1 and vapor and liquid as a feed to B2 column. From main column recycle streams of
vapor (V2) and liquid (L2) fed to the prefractionator column. Draw distillate, side stream,
bottom stream lines from B2 column. Provide the data to this by shortcut estimation. Provide
the number of stages to B1 and B2. Give stage location and flow rate to L2 and same stage
location to V1. Give flow rate and stage location to V2 and same stage location to L1. B1
column do not have degree of freedom so that only number of stages, feed location and
column pressure is given. B2 having more degree of freedom than B1. So that, for B2
column give feed stage location, recycle stream location and flow rate, distillate or bottom
flow rate, side stream location and flow rate, column pressure same as B114. After all
parameters fill then simulate this sheet. By using trial and error achieve required purity and
1626 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

minimum heat duties. Recycle stream that is liquid and vapor flows are more affected to the
energy consumption in the FTCDS.
Case study

Three different ternary systems has been simulated and compared heat duty with
conventional system. These three system conditions are given below:

Table 1: Specifications

1 2 3
Benzene Benzene Ethanol
Systems
Toluene Toluene 1-Propanol
p-Xylene Ethyl benzene 1-Butanol
Feed compositions 0.33 0.33 0.1
0.33 0.33 0.8
0.34 0.34 0.1
Feed conditions 100 kmol/hr 100 kmol/hr 300 kmol/hr
10 atm press 1.75 bar press 1 atm press
Saturated liquid Saturated liquid Saturated liquid
Required mole % 99.5 99.5 99
91 96 99
92 96 99
Column pressure and 10 atm 1.75 bar 1 atm
model Total condenser Total condenser Total condenser
Peng-Rob Peng-Rob NRTL

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this study, sensitivity analysis was used to analysis product purity and reboiler
duty for FTCDS. Those graphs are shown in graph 1 below for system 1 (Benzene Toluene
p-Xylene). Purity of side stream and bottom product linearly increases with feed stage
location while a decrease with side stream location increases and distillate purity remains
constant. When boil-up ratio increases then reboiler duty is also increases. Reboiler duty
decreases with liquid recycle flow increases and with vapor recycle flow reboiler duty are
decreases at some instant and then increases.
Int. J. Chem. Sci.: 14(3), 2016 1627

1.0 Mole fraction Vs Feed stage location Reboiler duty vs boilup rate
363100.0
Benzene
0.975

Reboiler duty (cal/sec)

Toluene
363080.0
Xylene
Mole fraction

0.95
363060.0 Reboiler duty
0.925

363040.0
0.9

11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 190.0 195.0 200.0 205.0 210.0
Feed stage location Boilup rate (kmol/hr)

Mole fraction vs liquid feed stage for main column Reboiler duty vs vapor recycle flow rate
1.0 500000.0

Benzene

Reboiler duty (cal/sec)

0.975
Toluene 450000.0
Mole fraction

Xylene Reboiler duty

0.95
400000.0
0.925

350000.0
0.9

50.0 51.0 52.0 53.0 54.0 55.0 56.0 57.0 58.0 59.0 60.0 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0

Liquid feed stage Vapor recycle flow rate (kmol/hr)

Mole fraction vs side stream stage location Reboiler duty vs liquid recycle flow rate
1.0
400000.0
Reboiler duty (cal/sec)

0.975
Benzene Reboiler duty
Mole fraction

Toluene 380000.0
0.95
Xylene

0.925
360000.0
0.9

30.0 31.0 32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0 39.0 40.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0
Side stream stage location Liquid recycle flow rate (kmol/hr)

Graph 1: Sensitivity analysis graphs for purity of products and reboiler duty Vs
different parameters
1628 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

Table 2: shows the all optimum values for the FTCDS of three systems with energy
saving compared to convention column sequencing. Above 35 % saving we got for these
systems.

Table 2: Results for three systems

1 2 3

Systems Benzene Benzene Ethanol

toluene toluene 1-propanol
p-Xylene ethyl benzene 1-butanol
Number of stages for prefractionator 34 36 34
column
Number of stages for main column 68 65 60
Feed stage for prefractionator column 16 18 14
Liquid feed stage for main column 18 17 14
Vapor feed stage for main column 53 53 51
Liquid flow rate from main column 68 55 94.39
(Kmol/hr)
Vapor flow rate from main column 125 45 209.195
(kmol/hr)
Side stream stage number 34 31 30
Side stream flow rate (kmol/hr) 33.5 32.65 241.145
Distillate rate (kmol/hr) 33 32.7943 29.0099
Reflux ratio 5.56081 4.7422 17.6141
Bottom rate (kmol/hr) 38.4977 34.5555 29.0099
Boilup rate (kmol/hr) 202.28 114 142.97
Boilup ratio 6.038 3.299 17.132
Condenser Duty (kw) -1465.67 -1546.39 -6006.89
Reboiler Duty (kw) 1519.98 1090.61 5955.55
Saving compared with conventional 40.73 36.46 40.06
sequencing in %
Int. J. Chem. Sci.: 14(3), 2016 1629

Conventional column sequencing

The simulation models for direct and indirect sequences were done in Aspen Plus.
With the help of simulation which minimizes the sum of reboiler duties for two columns
with desired purity constrains. For comparison with FTCDS minimum reboiler duty was
selected. Table 3 shows system 1, Table 4 shows system 2, Table 5 shows system 3.

Table 3: Results for System 1

System 1
Components Benzene, toluene, p-xylene
Conventional system Direct sequence Indirect sequence
Column B1 B2 B1 B2
Number of stages 31 40 31 40
Feed stage 15 20 11 22
Distillate Rate (kmol/hr) 32.38 32.99 65.99 32.99
Reflux ratio 5.1 3.929 2.194 3.99
Bottom rate (kmol/hr) 67.62 34.63 33.99 32.99
Boilup rate (kmol/hr) 184.34 157.38 209.46 157.25
Boilup ratio 2.73 4.54 6.16 4.76
Condenser duty (Kw) -1337.1176 -1173.67 -1538.48 -1119.00
Reboiler duty (kw) 1381.36 1183.18 1574.63 1134.27
Total reboiler duty (kw) 2564.54 2708.9
Selected for comparison with FTCDS 2564.54

Table 4: Results for System 2

System 2
Components Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene
Conventional system Direct sequence Indirect sequence
Column B1 B2 B1 B2
Number of stages 51 35 51 35
Feed stage 22 18 19 27
Cont…
1630 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

System 2
Components Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene
Conventional system Direct sequence Indirect sequence
Distillate Rate (kmol/hr) 32.9 32.775 65.5 32.7
Reflux ratio 3.125 2.593 1.57 1.65
Bottom rate (kmol/hr) 67.1 34.325 34.5 32.8
Boilup rate (kmol/hr) 69.3809 111.58 106.54 81.016
Boilup ratio 1.034 3.251 3.088 2.47
Condenser duty (Kw) -1114.50 -1057.88 -1489.82 -711.98
Reboiler duty (kw) 649.00 1067.51 1019.23 726.65
Total reboiler duty (kw) 1716.5 1745.88
Selected for comparison with FTCDS 1716.5

Table 5: Results for System 3

System 3
Components Ethanol, 1-propanol, 1-butanol
Conventional system Direct sequence Indirect sequence
Column B1 B2 B1 B2
Number of stages 52 32 52 32
Feed stage 14 20 26 16
Distillate Rate (kmol/hr) 29 241 269.85 27.95
Reflux ratio 10.41 1.301 1.2 10.25
Bottom rate (kmol/hr) 271 30 30.15 241.9
Boilup rate (kmol/hr) 302.61 536.25 558.17 290
Boilup ratio 1.12 17.88 18.51 1.19
Condenser duty (Kw) -3577.77 -6407.32 -6670.05 -3400.01
Reboiler duty (kw) 3510.69 6425.97 6686.87 3337.63
Total reboiler duty (kw) 9936.66 10024.50
Selected for comparison with FTCDS 9936.66
Int. J. Chem. Sci.: 14(3), 2016 1631

Analysis of the result

It can be observed that energy requirement for fully thermally coupled column is less
than conventional column sequencing. Table 6 shows percent saving of FTCDS compared
with conventional column sequencing.

Table 6: Energy saving

S. Energy consumption Energy %

System
No. FTCDS Conventional sequence saving

1 Benzene, toluene, p-Xylene 1519.98 2564.54 40.73

2 Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene 1090.61 1716.5 36.46
3 Ethanol, 1-propanol, 1-butanol 5955.55 9936.66 40.06

CONCLUSION

Distillation is a widely used separation technology. For distillation energy efficient

configuration is required. DWC is more efficient than other methods. Different
configurations were studied with rigorous simulation in Aspen Plus for three systems.
Sensitivity analysis parameters are used to obtain values for producing results. According to
results energy saving were obtained in fully thermally coupled column than conventional
distillation column. It can be concluded that fully thermally coupled distillation column
presents less reboiler duty.

REFERENCES

1. G. Hewitt, J. Quarini and M. Morell, More Efficient Distillation, The Chem. Eng.
(1999).
2. I. Dejanovic, Lj. Matijasevic and Z. Olujic, Dividing Wall Column-A Break Through
Towards Sustainable Distilling, Chem. Engg. Proc., 49, 559-580 (2010).
3. B. Rong, Synthesis of Dividing Wall Column (dwc) for Multicomponent Distillations-
A Systematic Approach, Chem. Engg. Res. Design, 89, 1281-1294 (2011).
4. R. Smith, Chemical Process Design and Integration, McGraw Hill (2005) pp. 211-225.
5. R. Agrawal and Z. T. Fidkowski, New Thermally Coupled Schemes for Ternary
Distillation, Am. Inst. Chem. Eng., 45(3), 485-496 (1999).
1632 A. P. Patil and S. M. Jadhav: Simulation Analysis of Fully….

6. R. O. Wright, Fractionation Apparatus, U.S. Patent No. 2471134 (1949).

7. O. Yildirim, A. A. Kiss and E. Y. Kenig, Dividing Wall Columns in Chemical Process
Industry: A Review on Current Activities, Separation and Purification Technology, 80,
403-417 (2011).
8. J. A. Caballero and I. E. Grossmann, Thermodynamically Equivalent Configurations
for Thermally Coupled Distillation, Am. Inst. Chem. Eng., 49(11), 2864-2865 (2003).
9. K. Muralikrishna, K. P. Madhavan and S. S. Shah, Development of Dividing w all
Distillation Column Design Space for a Specified Separation, Inst. Chem. Eng., Part A,
80, 155-166 (2002).
10. N. Quirante, J. Javaloyes and J. A. Caballero, Rigorous Design of Distillation
Columns Using Surrogate Models Based on Kriging Interpolation, Am. Inst. Chem.
Eng., 61(7), 2169-2187 (2015).
11. N. V. Long and M. Lee, Dividing Wall Column Structure Design using Response
Surface Methodology, Computer Chem. Engg., 37, 119-124 (2012).
12. C. Hiller, C. Buck, C. Ehlers and G. Fieg, Nonequilibrium Stage Modelling of
Dividing Wall Columns and Experimental Validation, Heat Mass Transfer, 46, 1209-
1220 (2010).
13. R. K. Dohare, K. Singh and R. Kumar, Sensitivity Analysis of Divided Wall
Distillation Column, Conference Paper, CHEMCON, India (2010).
14. R. Premkumar and G. P. Rangaiah, Retrofitting Conventional Column Systems to
Dividing-Wall Columns, Chem. Engg. Res. Design, 87, 47-60 (2009).

Revised : 03.06.2016 Accepted : 06.06.2016