Process Development, Assessment, and Control of Reactive Dividing-Wall Column with Vapor Recompression for Producing <i>n</i>-Propyl Acetate

Feng, Zemin; Shen, Weifeng; Rangaiah, Gade Pandu; Lv, Liping; Dong, Lichun

doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.8b05122

Cited by 40 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…( 4)) of a variety of equipment, including distillation column, reboiler, condenser, and compressor. The materials of all equipment were calculated as stainless steel, and the detailed calculation formula can be found in the literature [25,26]. The deprecia- tion period of the column shell, trays, heat exchangers, and other equipment was selected as three years, and that of the compressor as 10 years [27].…”

Section: Cost Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy‐Saving Separation of the Ethanol‐tert‐Butanol‐Water Azeotrope System Based on an Ionic Liquid

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The separation requirements of the ethanol‐tert‐butanol‐water system are difficult to meet due to the formation of azeotropes under normal pressure. After screening the four most important ionic liquids, i.e., [BMIM][BF4], [EMIM][Cl], [HMIM][Cl], and [EMIM][AC], ionic liquid [EMIM][AC] was selected as extractant, and quantum chemical calculations based on COSMO‐SAC theory were carried out to analyze the mechanism of the separation process. An ethanol‐tert‐butanol‐water extractive distillation process was designed, optimized with the goal of the lowest total annual economic cost, and the cost of carbon dioxide emissions was calculated. To further save energy, a heat pump distillation process was designed and compared with the conventional ionic liquid process. The annual total cost of the heat pump distillation process is reduced by 10.11 %, and carbon dioxide emission costs are reduced by 61.9 %. Comparison with the conventional extractive distillation process and its modified process revealed economic advantages for the ionic liquid extractive distillation process and its heat pump version.

show abstract

Section: Cost Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy‐Saving Separation of the Ethanol‐tert‐Butanol‐Water Azeotrope System Based on an Ionic Liquid

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The purpose of the optimization of the PSD is to obtain the optimum process parameters. The design variables such as the plate numbers, reflux ratios, and feeding positions can affect equipment investment and energy consumption to varying degrees . Total annual cost (TAC) is usually used as the objective function to optimize process parameters, which is composed of the total capital cost and the total operating cost.…”

Section: Process Design and Optimizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pressure swing distillation for the separation of methyl acetate‐methanol azeotrope

Wang

Liu

et al. 2019

Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pressure swing distillation (PSD) process was used to separate methyl acetate‐methanol azeotrope. Through the phase diagram analysis, distillation sequence and technological process were determined. On the basis of the principle of the minimum total annual cost (TAC), design variables such as feeding position, reflux ratio, and column plate number were optimized and the optimal parameters were determined. The high‐pressure column (HPC) under various pressures were analysed. The economic results of the PSD without heat integration, with partial heat integration, and with full heat integration were compared. The comparison results indicate that the TAC of the PSD without heat integration is the highest. The PSD with partial integration and full heat integration can effectively reduce the total capital cost and total operating cost. Compared with the PSD without heat integration, the TACs of partial heat integration and full heat integration exhibit 27% and 30% savings, respectively. Therefore, the PSD with full heat integration is more economically reasonable for separating methyl acetate‐methanol azeotrope.

show abstract

“…In addition to the RDWC arrangement proposed for formic acid production, a similar intensified process has been developed and simulated for n-propyl acetate synthesis, 7 hydrolysis of methyl acetate, 8 diethyl carbonate synthesis, 9 transesterification of 1-hexanol and n-butyl acetate, 10 and toluene diisocyanate synthesis. 11 Despite the various advantages mentioned in the literature, the obstacle hindering the application of RDWC is that the uncontrollable vapor split increases the difficulty for optimal operation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Design, Proportional-Integral, and Model Predictive Control of Intensified Process for Formic Acid Production II: Reactive Dividing Wall Column without Uncontrollable Vapor Split

Han

Yang

et al. 2021

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A reactive dividing wall column (RDWC) integrates reactive distillation and multiproduct separation together, leading to the realization of process intensification. However, the reluctance to use it is due to the uncontrollable vapor split, which is self-regulated according to the flow resistance on each side of the partition wall. For some cases, the pressure of reaction and multicomponent separation is different, which results in an energy penalty if we directly integrate these units together, for example, formic acid (FA) production through methyl formate (MF) as presented in the part I of this series (Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 22215). To tackle these obstacles, a new reactive dividing wall column without the uncontrollable vapor split (NV-RDWC) by converting the bidirectional vapor–liquid thermal coupling to liquid-only transfer stream is proposed in this work. Optimization was first carried out by coupling the genetic algorithm (GA) and rigorous simulation. On the basis of the optimal solution, a detailed comparison was conducted between the conventional reactive distillation process, RDWC, and NV-RDWC, and the results show the superiority of NV-RDWC. Then two multiloop proportional-integral (PI) control structures and a model predictive control (MPC) for NV-RDWC were developed, respectively, to investigate their control performance. The dynamic response in the face of feed disturbance shows that MPC could give superior control performance for this complex coupled process.

show abstract

Process Development, Assessment, and Control of Reactive Dividing-Wall Column with Vapor Recompression for Producing n-Propyl Acetate

Cited by 40 publications

References 47 publications

Energy‐Saving Separation of the Ethanol‐tert‐Butanol‐Water Azeotrope System Based on an Ionic Liquid

Energy‐Saving Separation of the Ethanol‐tert‐Butanol‐Water Azeotrope System Based on an Ionic Liquid

Pressure swing distillation for the separation of methyl acetate‐methanol azeotrope

Optimal Design, Proportional-Integral, and Model Predictive Control of Intensified Process for Formic Acid Production II: Reactive Dividing Wall Column without Uncontrollable Vapor Split

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About