Comparative analysis of extractive and pressure swing distillation for separation of THF-water separation

Ghuge, Pravin D.; Mali, Nilesh A.; Joshi, Sunil S.

doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2017.03.019

Cited by 63 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An experimental work has also been used to compare various entrainers for THF–water separation. 7 For the separation of an equimolar THF–water mixture, Ghuge et al 8 simulated both extractive distillation and pressure swing distillation. Their works have been on selection of the suitable process on the basis of the total annual cost (TAC).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Controllability Features of Extractive and Pressure Swing Distillations on the Example of Tetrahydrofuran Dewatering

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The controllability study is an integral part of chemical process design. In this work, the controllability of two special distillation techniques, extractive distillation and pressure swing distillation, designed for the separation of azeotropic mixtures is investigated with dynamic tools. The control design interface of Aspen Plus and Matlab are applied for the modeling and evaluation of the two systems. Dynamic controllability indices are determined and aggregated in a desirability function. The results are compared to obtain efficient help for process design activity. The pressure swing distillation shows significantly better controllability features than the extractive distillation. The reason can be the fact that in the case of the extractive distillation, a third compound, the extractive agent, is added to the system to carry out the separation, therefore making the system more complex. As far as the selection of manipulated variables is concerned, in the case of the extractive distillation, the reflux flows should be preferred to the reflux ratios but in the case of the pressure swing distillation, the reboiler heat loads are preferred to the reflux ratios since those are closer to the controlled compositions. Both separation systems show worse controllability features if the product purity requirement is approaching to the pure products, that is, close to 100%. Although the energy consumption of the pressure swing distillation is higher than that of the extractive distillation, it has the inherent feature that it can be automatically heat integrated due to a column operated at high pressure and, as a consequence, higher temperatures.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Controllability Features of Extractive and Pressure Swing Distillations on the Example of Tetrahydrofuran Dewatering

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It does not cause the same potential problem of the added component compared to extractive distillation . Up to now, a considerable amount of literature has investigated the double‐column PSD process for separating the binary azeotropic system in terms of steady simulation and dynamic control . However, only a limited number of studies on the triple‐column PSD process for the separation of ternary multi‐azeotropic mixtures have been reported and gained extensive attention …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,2 Up to now, a considerable amount of literature has investigated the double-column PSD process for separating the binary azeotropic system in terms of steady simulation and dynamic control. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] However, only a limited number of studies on the triple-column PSD process for the separation of ternary multi-azeotropic mixtures have been reported and gained extensive attention. [11][12][13][14] The mixture of tetrahydrofuran (THF), ethanol and water is often encountered in the chemical industry, such as the norgestrel production or the process of dehydrating 1,4-butanediol.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of a ternary mixture with multiple azeotropes via pressure‐swing distillation

Wang

Guang

Cui

et al. 2019

J of Chemical Tech & Biotech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND The ternary mixture of tetrahydrofuran (THF), ethanol and water contains multiple azeotropes with the sensitivity to pressure variation. The pressure‐swing distillation (PSD) is a promising method to achieve the system's separation objective since it avoids many potential problems caused by adding a third component. RESULT A variety of separation sequences were synthesized on the ternary diagram, including the sequences of WLEMTH, WLTH EM, THEMWL, THWLEM, EMTHWL and EMWLTH. The optimal design parameters of these sequences were obtained based on the minimum total annual cost (TAC) by using the sequential iterative global optimization algorithm. Furthermore, six kinds of heat integration that improve energy efficiency were implemented for the optimal alternative of EMTHWL. CONCLUSION The results show that the EMTHWL configuration has the lowest TAC, saving 37.84% of the economic cost compared to the THEMWL which has the highest TAC. The partial heat integration among three columns can achieve almost the same reductions in energy requirements and carbon dioxide emissions (44.9%) as the full heat integration among three columns (45.4%). In addition, it is predictable that the partially heat‐integrated alternative compared to other fully heat‐integrated schemes has less undesirable side effects in the aspect of dynamic control. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

“…For TAC calculation, the tray efficiency was assumed to be 0.75 for estimating real trays. The payback period as set at 3 yr and the formulas for the calculations are summarized in Table . In the global economic optimization process, several key variables such as distillate flow, reflux ratios, side flow and location were adopted to meet the design requirements of recovery and purity of products and solvents.…”

Section: Design Basismentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermal coupled extractive distillation sequences with three entrainers for the separation of azeotrope isopropyl alcohol + diisopropyl ether

Zhang

Gao

et al. 2020

J of Chemical Tech & Biotech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND During the synthesis of isopropyl alcohol (IPA) by hydration of propylene, diisopropyl ether (DIPE) is usually produced as a by‐product. Because IPA and DIPE can form a binary homogeneous azeotrope with the minimum boiling temperature at atmospheric pressure, it is difficult to separate the binary mixture by simple distillation. RESULT For separating the azeotrope IPA + DIPE, side‐stream extractive distillation column (SSED) and extractive dividing wall column (EDWC) processes with three entrainers [2‐methoxyethanol (2‐MEA), 2‐ethoxyethanol and propylene glycol ethyl ether (PGEE)] were simulated and optimized based on the minimal total annual cost (TAC). Moreover, CO2 emissions of the six sequences were calculated and the impact on the environment evaluated. CONCLUSIONS The sequence of SSED with PGEE as entrainer can reduce TAC by ≤34.48%, but EDWC with PGEE can offer TAC reduction of ≤52.46%. The results demonstrate that the EDWC sequence with PGEE as entrainer is favourable for separating the binary azeotrope IPA + DIPE. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Comparative analysis of extractive and pressure swing distillation for separation of THF-water separation

Cited by 63 publications

References 17 publications

Comparison of Controllability Features of Extractive and Pressure Swing Distillations on the Example of Tetrahydrofuran Dewatering

Comparison of Controllability Features of Extractive and Pressure Swing Distillations on the Example of Tetrahydrofuran Dewatering

Separation of a ternary mixture with multiple azeotropes via pressure‐swing distillation

Thermal coupled extractive distillation sequences with three entrainers for the separation of azeotrope isopropyl alcohol + diisopropyl ether

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About