ECONOMOMIC OPTIMIZATION OF DISTILLATION

COLUMNS
Date: 13th February, 2024
Aidoo Samuel Ackah Doreen
Department of Chemical Engineering, Kwame Nkrumah University of Sci. and Tech.

REPORT INFO
Keywords: ABSTRACT

Distillation The purpose of this experiment is to optimize a

Optimization distillation process to determine the minimum cost for

the process. Aspen was employed to model a binary
Reflux ratio
distillation process to separate propane and isobutane
Total annual cost
taking into consideration parameters that affect the cost
Aspen plus
of the distillation process.

Aspen was used to both estimate a good conceptual

design and perform economic optimization calculations
on a rigorous distillation. The results from Aspen were
compared to the traditional method McCabe-Thiele.
The effect of the feed stage on both the reboiler and
condenser duty were discussed in the report.

1. INTRODUCTION

Distillation is a widely used separation process in various industries including

petrochemical, pharmaceutical, and food industries. It plays a crucial role in separating liquid
mixtures based on the differences in their boiling points. Distillation stands as a cornerstone
separation technique across diverse industries due to its unparalleled importance in purifying
and separating complex mixtures. Its versatility extends from the production of fuels,
chemicals, and pharmaceuticals to the refinement of beverages and extraction of essential
oils. Distillation enables the isolation of components based on differences in boiling points,
1
facilitating the extraction of pure substances from complex mixtures economically and
efficiently. Moreover, its adaptability to various scales, from laboratory setups to industrial-
scale plants, underscores its indispensability in research and large-scale manufacturing
(Luyben & American Institute of Chemical Engineers., 2006) . Additionally, distillation plays
a pivotal role in environmental sustainability efforts by facilitating the recovery and recycling
of valuable resources from waste streams, contributing to the circular economy paradigm.
Thus, distillation stands as an essential process driving innovation, sustainability, and
economic growth across numerous sectors globally.

However, the efficiency of distillation processes heavily depends on several factors such as
operating conditions, equipment design, and energy consumption. Economic optimization of
distillation processes aims to enhance efficiency while minimizing costs, making it a
significant area of research and application (Taqvi et al., 2016).

The distillation column's design and operation significantly impact the overall efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of the process. Through Aspen Plus simulations, we can model different
configurations of the distillation column and assess their performance in terms of both
separation efficiency and economic feasibility.

Moreover, Aspen Plus provides powerful tools for rigorous optimization, enabling us to find
the optimal operating conditions that minimize energy consumption, maximize product
purity, and reduce capital costs (Ahmadi Pouya & Soltanali, 2017) . By integrating economic
factors into the optimization process, we aim to achieve an optimal balance between
operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

In this lab report, we investigate the economic optimization of a distillation process using
Aspen Plus, a comprehensive process simulation software widely utilized in the chemical
engineering field. The primary objective is to analyze various parameters such as reflux ratio,
feed tray location, and operating conditions to minimize a performance function typically the
Total Annual Cost to optimize the distillation process economically.

1.1 Objectives
 Use shortcut distillation models to get good estimates as a first step in a conceptual
design
 To perform economic distillation optimization on a rigorous distillation

2
 2. Methodology

The Aspen software was used together with the McCabe-Thiele method for this experiment.
Excel was used to perform the calculations.

2.1 Procedure

Aspen was launched and a blank sheet was opened. The components used in the experiment
were selected (isobutane and propane). The property method CHAO-SEA was selected and
the simulation page was run. the DSTWU distillation column was selected and the stream
input and outputs were fixed. The stream conditions (temperature, pressure and flow rate) and
the distillation column specification were inputted and run.

A new black sheet was opened and the same components and property method were chosen.
The simulation page was loaded and the RADFRAC distillation column was selected. The
input and output streams were connected and the column specifications were inputted based
on the results from the DSTWU column. The simulation was then run.

Sensitivity analyses were run on both the DSTWU and RADFRAC columns and the results
were recorded. Excel was used to calculate the TAC using the data and formulas provided
and a graph of TAC against reflux ratio was plotted to determine the optimum cost.

Figure 1. A schematic diagram of a distillation column

3
 2.2 Formulas used in Excel

1. L= (NT-2) × 0.61 × 1.2 ………………. (1)

2. Column cost = 17640 × D1.066 × L0.802 …………………. (2)
QR ×1000
3. AR = ………………………. (3)
dtr ×U r
QC × 1000
4. AC = ……………………… (4)
dtc ×U C
5. Hx = 7296 (AR0.65 + AC0.65) …………………. (5)
QR × cost of energy ×3600 ×24 ×365
6. Energy cost = ………………. (6)
1000
7. Capital cost = Column cost + Hx …………………... (7)
Capital cost
8. TAC = Energy cost + ……………………… (8)
3

Where:

L = length of column

D = Diameter of column

AR = Area of reboiler

AC = Area of condenser

Hx = Heat exchanger cost (reboiler and condenser)

QR = Heat transfer coefficient for the reboiler

QC = Heat transfer coefficient for the condenser

dtr = differential temperature for the reboiler

dtc = differential temperature for the condenser

4
 3. Results and Discussion
3.1 Table of results

REFLUX, STAGES, REBDUTY CDUTY DIAMETER

RR NT (MW) (MW) (m)

2.657 475 5.801 -4.723 2.223

2.705 102 5.86 -4.78 2.236

2.753 63 5.919 -4.836 2.249

2.8 48 5.977 -4.892 2.262

2.848 41 6.036 -4.949 2.275

2.896 36 6.095 -5.006 2.287

2.944 33 6.154 -5.062 2.3

2.992 32 6.212 -5.119 2.312

3.04 30 6.271 -5.176 2.325

3.087 29 6.33 -5.234 2.337

3.135 29 6.389 -5.291 2.349

3.183 28 6.448 -5.348 2.361

3.231 28 6.507 -5.406 2.373

3.279 27 6.566 -5.464 2.385

3.326 27 6.625 -5.522 2.396

3.374 27 6.684 -5.58 2.408

3.422 26 6.743 -5.638 2.42

3.47 26 6.803 -5.696 2.431

3.518 26 6.862 -5.754 2.443

3.566 26 6.921 -5.813 2.454

5
3.613 26 6.981 -5.872 2.465

3.661 25 7.04 -5.93 2.476

3.709 25 7.1 -5.989 2.487

3.757 25 7.159 -6.048 2.498

3.805 25 7.219 -6.107 2.509

3.852 24 7.279 -6.166 2.52

3.9 24 7.338 -6.225 2.531

REFLUX, STAGES, REBDUTY CDUTY DIAMETER

RR NT (MW) (MW) (m)

3.948 24 7.398 -6.285 2.542

3.996 24 7.458 -6.344 2.553

4.044 23 7.518 -6.403 2.563

4.091 23 7.578 -6.463 2.574

4.139 23 7.637 -6.522 2.584

4.187 23 7.697 -6.582 2.595

4.235 23 7.757 -6.641 2.606

4.283 22 7.817 -6.701 2.616

4.331 22 7.877 -6.761 2.626

4.378 22 7.937 -6.82 2.637

4.426 22 7.997 -6.88 2.647

4.474 22 8.057 -6.94 2.657

4.522 21 8.117 -6.999 2.668

4.57 21 8.177 -7.059 2.678

4.617 21 8.237 -7.119 2.688

6
4.665 21 8.297 -7.179 2.698

4.713 21 8.357 -7.239 2.708

4.761 21 8.417 -7.299 2.718

4.809 21 8.478 -7.359 2.728

4.857 20 8.538 -7.419 2.738

4.904 20 8.598 -7.479 2.748

4.952 20 8.658 -7.539 2.758

5 20 8.718 -7.599 2.768

7
L(m) Column Cost($) AR(m) Ac(m) Hx, $ Capital
($) Cost ($) Energy($) REFLUX TAC($)
346.236 4496893.165 293.4778209 398.8077 650846.5 5147739.63 859819.5792 2.657 2575733
73.2 1301287.943 296.4626842 403.6208 655581.2 1956869.123 868564.512 2.705 1520854
44.652 880829.3048 299.4475474 408.3494 660248.6 1541077.905 877309.4448 2.753 1391002
33.672 706736.2391 302.3818197 413.078 664865.7 1371601.964 885906.1584 2.8 1343107
28.548 622891.574 305.3666829 417.891 669546.4 1292437.937 894651.0912 2.848 1325464
24.888 561125.8687 308.3515461 422.7041 674209.3 1235335.202 903396.024 2.896 1315174
22.692 524216.1777 311.3364093 427.4327 678806.8 1203023.017 912140.9568 2.944 1313149
21.96 513450.6886 314.2706816 432.2458 683403.4 1196854.05 920737.6704 2.992 1319689
20.496 488724.4667 317.2555448 437.0588 688015.1 1176739.599 929482.6032 3.04 1321729
19.764 477287.8666 320.240408 441.9563 692657.7 1169945.582 938227.536 3.087 1328209
19.764 479900.8316 323.2252712 446.7693 697236.2 1177137 946972.4688 3.135 1339351
19.032 468128.859 326.2101344 451.5824 701798.4 1169927.255 955717.4016 3.183 1345693
19.032 470665.6261 329.1949976 456.4799 706391.6 1177057.21 964462.3344 3.231 1356815
18.3 458550.2889 332.1798608 461.3774 710968.6 1169518.925 973207.2672 3.279 1363047
18.3 460805.1224 335.164724 466.2749 715529.8 1176334.894 981952.2 3.326 1374064
18.3 463265.72 338.1495872 471.1724 720075.2 1183340.921 990697.1328 3.374 1385144
17.568 450726.47 341.1344504 476.0698 724605.1 1175331.605 999442.0656 3.422 1391219
17.568 452910.7717 344.1699045 480.9673 729150.8 1182061.607 1008335.218 3.47 1402356
17.568 455294.3904 347.1547677 485.8648 733650.3 1188944.676 1017080.15 3.518 1413395
17.568 457480.0532 350.1396309 490.8468 738180.6 1195660.674 1025825.083 3.566 1424379
17.568 459666.3627 353.175085 495.8287 742726.7 1202393.069 1034718.235 3.613 1435516
16.836 446354.9701 356.1599482 500.7262 747181.6 1193536.586 1043463.168 3.661 1441309
16.836 448469.1561 359.1954023 505.7081 751698.1 1200167.253 1052356.32 3.709 1452412
16.836 450583.9594 362.1802655 510.69 756169.4 1206753.379 1061101.253 3.757 1463352
16.836 452699.3774 365.2157196 515.672 760656.9 1213356.254 1069994.405 3.805 1474446
16.104 438886.7142 368.2511737 520.6539 765130 1204016.76 1078887.557 3.852 1480226
16.104 440929.2245 371.2360369 525.6358 769558.9 1210488.08 1087632.49 3.9 1491129
16.104 442972.3208 374.271491 530.7022 774048.6 1217020.928 1096525.642 3.948 1502199
16.104 445016.0006 377.3069451 535.6841 778479.9 1223495.888 1105418.794 3.996 1513251
15.372 430509.1203 380.3423992 540.6661 782897.6 1213406.678 1114311.946 4.044 1518781
15.372 432479.0243 383.3778533 545.7324 787345.9 1219824.922 1123205.098 4.091 1529813
15.372 434270.3284 386.3627165 550.7144 791706.9 1225977.189 1131950.03 4.139 1540609
15.372 436241.2914 389.3981706 555.7807 796128.4 1232369.725 1140843.182 4.187 1551633
15.372 438212.8058 392.4336247 560.7627 800493 1238705.854 1149736.334 4.235 1562638
14.64 423120.7802 395.4690788 565.829 804888.4 1228009.169 1158629.486 4.283 1567966
14.64 424845.1823 398.5045329 570.8954 809270.8 1234115.952 1167522.638 4.331 1578895
14.64 426742.5251 401.539987 575.8773 813597 1240339.57 1176415.79 4.378 1589862
14.64 428467.8357 404.5754412 580.9437 817954.1 1246421.912 1185308.942 4.426 1600783
14.64 430193.5765 407.6108953 586.0101 822298.6 1252492.155 1194202.094 4.474 1611699
13.908 414677.9525 410.6463494 590.992 826587.8 1241265.74 1203095.246 4.522 1616850
13.908 416335.0039 413.6818035 596.0584 830907.8 1247242.776 1211988.398 4.57 1627736
13.908 417992.4637 416.7172576 601.1247 835215.6 1253208.097 1220881.55 4.617 1638618
13.908 419650.3305 419.7527117 606.1911 839511.5 1259161.833 1229774.702 4.665 1649495
13.908 421308.603 422.7881658 611.2575 843795.5 1265104.111 1238667.854 4.713 1660369
13.908 422967.2796 425.8236199 616.3238 848067.8 1271035.055 1247561.006 4.761 1671239
13.908 424626.3591 428.9096649 621.3902 852357.2 1276983.546 1256602.378 4.809 1682264
13.176 408196.3039 431.945119 626.4566 856606.3 1264802.58 1265495.53 4.857 1687096
13.176 409785.7475 434.9805731 631.523 860844 1270629.741 1274388.682 4.904 1697932
13.176 411375.5728 438.0160272 636.5893 865070.5 1276446.027 1283281.834 4.952 1708764
13.176 412965.7786 441.0514813 641.6557 869285.8 1282251.554 1292174.986 5 1719592

8
Figure 2. A plot of TAC against the Reflux ratio

Figure 3. An Equilibrium plot for propane and isobutane

9
Figure 4. A plot of reboiler and condenser duties against the feed stage

3.2 Discussion

In this experiment, the main objective was to optimize a distillation process

economically. This was done by considering certain factors which affect the cost of
the distillation process. The main factors considered were the reflux ratio, the feed
stage and the operating pressure as they are crucial in determining the cost-
effectiveness of the distillation process.

Aspen was the software used to simulate the distillation process and the results
showed that 28 stages were required for the distillation process to separate propane
and isobutane and a reflux ratio of 3.18. The McCabe-Thiele method was also used to
analyze the process and the results showed a maximum number of stages of (32) and a
reflux ratio of (2.72).

The change in the number of stages derived from the two techniques stems from their
distinct methodologies. Aspen Plus employs a comprehensive simulation-based
method, taking into account multiple factors and constraints, thereby yielding a more
precise optimization outcome. On the contrary, the McCabe and Thiele method relies
on simplified assumptions and graphical computations, potentially overlooking
certain intricacies inherent in the distillation process.

10
 From Figure 4, the optimum feed stage which gives the best duties was 13. Since the
feed stage provided form the Aspen simulation was not far off it can be concluded
that Aspen gave an accurate and rigorous simulation for the distillation process.

To determine the optimum Total Annual Cost, the reflux ratio was varied with the
TAC and plotted in Figure 2 as shown above. The reflux ratio which gave the
minimum TAC value of $1,313,149 was 2.944. The total annual cost represents the
overall expenses associated with the distillation process, including energy
consumption, raw material cost, maintenance and labor. The reflux ratio is the ratio of
the amount of liquid reflux returned to the top of the column to the amount of product
removed from the column’s bottom. The reflux ratio was used because of its direct
effect on the cost-effectiveness of the distillation process. Higher reflux ratios require
more energy due to increased circulation of the reflux stream resulting in higher
operational costs. Also, a higher reflux ratio may necessitate a larger column size to
accommodate the increased reflux flow, which can lead to higher capital costs
(Skogestad, n.d.)

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

The optimization study aimed to reduce operational costs as well as capital costs in the
distillation process. Results from Aspen Plus indicated an optimal design featuring 28
stages, a feed stage at 14, and a reflux ratio of 3.18. Comparing this with the McCabe and
Thiele method revealed minor disparities in stage counts. Assessing the minimum reflux
ratio and total annual cost requires consideration of industry norms and economic
viability. To gauge the significance of these factors, they must be compared against
industry standards and economic feasibility and benchmarked against analogous
processes or alternative separation methods to ascertain their competitiveness and
profitability.

11
 5. References
1. Ahmadi Pouya, R., & Soltanali, S. (2017). Energy and Economic Optimization of
Distillation Sequencing. Environmental Energy and Economic Research, 1(1), 125–
140. https://doi.org/10.22097/eeer.2017.46462
2. Taqvi, S. A., Tufa, L. D., & Muhadizir, S. (2016). Optimization and Dynamics of
Distillation Column Using Aspen Plus®. Procedia Engineering, 148, 978–984.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.484
3. Skogestad, S. (n.d.). DYNAMICS AND CONTROL OF DISTILLATION COLUMNS
A tutorial introduction. http://www.chembio.ntnu.no/users/skoge
4. Luyben, W. L., & American Institute of Chemical Engineers. (2006). Distillation
design and control using Aspen simulation. Wiley-Interscience.

Appendix

Calculations; McCabe and Thiele Method

General Mole Balance

900 = D + B………………. eqn (1)

Mole Balance on Propane

0.4(900) = 0.98(D) + 0.01(B)…………. eqn (2)

Solve Simultaneously:

D = 361.856 kmol/hr
B = 538.144 kmol/hr

From the graph:

XD 0.98
0.30 = =
R min +1 R min +1

Rmin = 2.27
R = 1.2 × Rmin = 1.2 × 2.27
R = 2.72

12
DECLARATION
I declare that:
 This report is my unaided work and is a true reflection of the lab I participated in.
 Large portions of it have not been submitted by another student for assessment.
 Significant portions of it were not copied from an internet source or a book.
 Significant portions of it were not written using ChatGPT or any other AI tool.
 If any of the above statements turn out to be false, I forfeit the marks awarded to this
report.

…………………………………. ………………. ………………….

Name Date Signature

…………………………………. ………………. ………………….

Name Date Signature

…………………………………. ………………. ………………….

Name Date Signature

13
14
15