Separating Mixture Glycols in DWC with Flow Rate-Composition Cascade Control Structure

Ma, Zhihui; Wu, Yanyang; Xu, Jianyuan; Chen, Kui; Wu, Bin; Ji, Lijun

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3915508

Journal of Chemistry

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusions Data Availability Disclosure Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 3915508 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3915508

Separating Mixture Glycols in DWC with Flow Rate-Composition Cascade Control Structure

Zhihui Ma,¹Yanyang Wu,¹Jianyuan Xu,¹Kui Chen,¹Bin Wu,¹and Lijun Ji¹

Academic Editor: Dario Pasini

Received16 Mar 2022

Accepted24 Jul 2022

Published06 Sept 2022

Abstract

Dividing wall column (DWC) is an advanced technology which could decrease energy consumption. As the vertical wall inserted in DWC increases the degree of freedom of systems, the control becomes more difficult than the conventional columns. In this study, the mixture glycols (1, 2-propanediol+ 1, 3-butanediol+ 1, 4-butanediol) were taken as feed, an optimized DWC structure was proposed, and three control structures for DWC were tested by ± 10% feed disturbances. The temperature control structure (CS1) was hard to control the system while composition control structure (CS2) and flow rate-composition cascade control structure (CS3) had good performance on controlling the DWC. It showed that CS3 was superior to CS2, as CS3 could stabilize the DWC within 4 hours, and the maximum deviations of the three products, namely 1, 2-propanediol, 1, 3-butanediol and 1, 4-butanediol, were 0.07%, 1.44%, and 0.46% respectively, while CS2 could realize the stability within 7 hours, and the corresponding numbers were 0.35%, 2.78%, and 0.41%, respectively.

1. Introduction

Distillation is the most widely used technology to separate mixtures in chemical industry, and about 95% of liquid mixtures are separated by distillation [1, 2]. However, it is an energy-intensive process, which accounts for an estimated 3% of the energy consumption in the world [2–4]. In order to decrease the energy requirements in distillation, several technologies have been proposed, such as heat pump assisted distillation column, internally heat integrated distillation column, and fully thermally coupled column (Petlyuk column).

DWC is thermodynamically equivalent to and further a practical implementation of the Petlyuk column. A vertical wall which splits the column into two sections is inserted in DWC. The feed enters into the prefractionator side, and the side product leaves column from the opposite side of the wall, which is called as the main fractionator. The component with low boiling point is removed from the top while the one with high boling point is removed from the bottom. DWC only needs a single tower with one reboiler and one condenser for separation of multicomponent mixtures. In the meanwhile, the thermal efficiency improves because the remixing effect could be highly decreased by the vertical wall [5]. It is reported that DWC could reduce almost 30% of energy consumption and also 30% capital costs in comparison to an ordinary distillation sequence [5–9]. DWC was first applied in industry by BASF in 1985 [10]. In 2010, there were over 100 DWCs reported in operation [7, 11], most of which were run by BASF. However, DWCs still accounted for a minor proportion compared to the over 40,000 conventional distillation columns in chemical industry [12].

It is generally considered that intensified processes, like DWC, are more difficult to be controlled than conventional processes due to the following: (a) the more degree of freedom than a conventional distillation column, (b) the highly nonlinear behavior caused by the complicated structure, and (c) the strong interactions between manipulated and controlled variables [5, 13–17]. Dynamic control is one of the keys to the operation of DWC.

Several control structures have been tested in the open literature, such as temperature control structure, composition control structure, temperature difference control (TDC) structure, temperature-composition cascade control structure, model predictive control (MPC) structure, and so on. Some have been applied into the separation of the systems, like alcohols, alkanes, and aromatics. The control structures usually take reflux ratio (RR), reboiler duty (Q_R), and side product flow rates (S) as manipulated variables. Liquid split ratio is an optional manipulated variable for the control of the heavy component at the top of the prefractionator [18, 19].

Composition control structure takes composition, reflux drum level, and sump level of column as controlled variables. It can deal with feed disturbances and return to steady state in 2∼10 hr [12, 18–36], while sometimes it takes a long time to get steady [24, 33, 35].

Different from composition control structure, temperature control structure takes the temperatures at reference stages as manipulated variables. It can deal with feed disturbances and return to steady state in 2∼5 hr [37–48]. Temperature control structure responds fast to disturbances, but sometimes the purity of products may have big deviations [43, 45, 49].

Composition-temperature cascade control structure can overcome long time delays caused by composition controllers and deal with feed disturbances with small deviations. The system with the structure can recover to steady state in 2∼6 hr [49, 50]. The cascade control structure still has a high cost and it is difficult to be tuned because of its complexity.

TDC structure adds additional temperature measurements into temperature control structure in order to get a better performance on dealing with feed disturbance, especially for the feed composition disturbance. TDC structure can deal with feed disturbances in 2∼5 hr [16, 51–56]. Although TDC always has better performance than temperature control structure, deviations for product purity still exist.

MPC structure is an advanced control structure, and it is an optimization based on multivariable constrained control technology [57]. Adrian et al. [58] compared MPC with conventional PI control in DWC. MPC structure shows a tighter and faster control than PI control. It can deal with feed disturbances in 2∼8 hr [17, 26, 57–62]. However, MPC is hard to implement and needs more efforts than PI control [15, 57].

Glycols including 1, 2-propanediol, 1, 3-butanediol, and 1, 4-butanediol with a wide application could be used as biofuels which are considered promising alternative energy [63, 64]. They have some unusual properties, such as availability, nonvolatility, nontoxicity, and biodegradability. Such advantages make a promising application of 1, 2-propanediol, 1, 3-butanediol, and 1, 4-butanediol into the production of polyester fibers, antifreeze materials, packaging materials, engineering plastics, and surfactants [65–67]. However, the separation becomes one of the keys to the industrial applications of the bio-glycols.

Several groups of vapor-liquid equilibria data of glycols were studied in the literature [68–70]. In this paper, the separation of mixture glycols (1, 2-propanediol+ 1, 3-butanediol+ 1, 4-butanediol) by DWC and three control structures have been studied by ±10% feed disturbances. All of the three structures were based on simple single-loop PI control. This study could provide a potential solution to the systems with similar molecular structures and properties by DWC.

2. Steady-State Design

The ternary system of 1, 2-propanediol (1, 2-PG) + 1, 3-butanediol (1, 3-BD) + 1, 4-butanediol (1, 4-BD) was studied. The boiling points of the glycols are 460.45 K, 481.38 K, and 501.15 K, and the relative volatilities are 3.74, 2.19, and 1, respectively. A mixture of 41.0 wt% 1, 2-PG, 28.0 wt% 1, 3-BD, and 31.0 wt% 1, 4-BD was taken as feed and its flow rate was set as 100 kg/hr at boiling point. The target purity of 1, 2-PG, 1, 3-BD, and 1, 4-BD was 99.8 wt%, 97.2 wt%, and 98.0 wt%, respectively. Rigorous simulations were carried out by RADFRAC modules in Aspen Plus with the UNIQ-HOC thermodynamic model.

As shown in Figure 1, the simulation used two-shell configuration including a prefractionator and a main column, which was thermodynamically equivalent to the DWC. The number of trays including a condenser and a reboiler was 50 for the main column in DWC. The vertical wall was placed from stage 6 to stage 38 in column. In order to obtain high-purity products, the pressure of the condenser was set as 0.8 bar and tray pressure drop of 0.0068 atm was considered. Detailed design data for DWC are listed in Table 1.

3. Control Structure Design

3.1. Temperature Control Structure (CS1)

Temperature control structure is widely used in industry because it is simple and cheap. In this study, the temperature control structure was first tested for the DWC. Reflux rate (RR), side stream flow rate (S), and reboiler duty (Q_R) were taken as manipulated variables and temperature at reference stages was taken as control variable. In order to find the appreciate reference stages, a small change (+1%) was implemented in an independent variable (RR or Q_R) while keeping the other variables constant. Figure 2 shows the sensitivity analysis for the DWC. Apparently, stages 13 and 39 could be selected as the reference stages for the side stream and stripping sections, respectively. The rectifying section accounted for only 5 theoretical trays, so stage 5 was chosen as reference stage for the rectifying section.

Figure 3 illustrates CS1 of DWC. The controller labeled TC5 turned the temperature at stage 5 by manipulating RR, the temperature at stage 13 was controlled by S, and Q_R was the manipulated variable for controlling the temperature at reference stage 39 with TC39. The three loops were tuned sequentially, the gain (K_C) and integral time () of the temperature controllers were obtained through the relay-feedback test and Tyreus–Luyben tuning method, and the dead time for temperature controllers was set as 1 min. Table 2 gives the detailed temperature controller parameters in CS1. To complete CS1, Kc and were 0.5 and 0.3 min for the flow controllers, respectively, 20 and 12 min for the pressure controllers, respectively, and 2 and 9999 min for liquid level controllers, respectively.

Figure 4 shows the responses of CS1 under ±10% feed disturbances. Apparently, the control structure showed a poor control performance on dealing with the disturbances; the purity of all the three products presented big deviations after 10hr, especially for the side stream 1, 3-BD.

3.2. Composition Control Structure (CS2)

CS2 adopted composition controllers instead of temperature controllers. As shown in Figure 5, the controller CC1 maintained the purity of 1, 2-PG by manipulating RR, CC2 maintained the purity of 1, 3-BD by manipulating S, and CC3 maintained the purity of 1, 4-BD by manipulating Q_R. The set dead time for composition controllers was 3 min in consideration of its longer time delay than that in temperature controller. The detailed parameters for composition controllers obtained by the relay-feedback test and Tyreus–Luyben tuning method are listed in Table 3, and the other controllers used the same parameters as CS1.

Figure 6 illustrates the dynamic responses of CS2 under ±10% feed disturbances, and the product purity could get steady within 6 hr with almost same purity to the initial states. The maximum deviations due to feed flow rate disturbances in the purity of 1, 2-PG, 1, 3-BD, 1, 4-BD were 0.35%, 2.78%, and 0.41%, respectively, and the maximum deviations due to feed composition disturbances were 0.15%, 1.54%, and 0.41%, respectively.

3.3. Flow Rate-Composition Cascade Control Structure (CS3)

Although CS2 could deal with ±10% feed disturbances well, the long recovery time, maximum deviations, and high expense for composition controllers still needed to be improved. In CS3, a temperature controller was used to manipulate RR and an additional flow rate controller was added into side stream control loop. Similar to CS1, stage 5 was taken as reference stage for the rectifying section.

Figure 7 shows the cascade control structure CS3 of DWC. The controller TC1 controlled the temperature at stage 5 by manipulating RR, the cascade loop manipulated S in order to control the purity of 1, 3-BD, and CC3 manipulated Q_R to control the purity of 1, 4-BD. The dead time was 1 min and 3 min for temperature controller and composition controllers, respectively. Table 4 lists the detailed parameters for temperature controller and composition controllers obtained by the relay-feedback test and Tyreus–Luyben tuning method. The other controllers employed same parameters as CS1.

Figure 8 describes the dynamic responses under ±10% feed disturbances, and the product purity could be steady within 4 hr with the same purity as the initial states. The maximum deviations resulted from feed flow rate disturbances in the purity of 1, 2-PG, 1, 3-BD, and 1, 4-BD were 0.07%, 1.44%, and 0.46%, respectively, and the maximum deviations caused by feed composition disturbances were 0.06%, 0.72%, and 0.31%, respectively.

4. Conclusions

In this paper, three types of control structures for DWC were studied by adding ±10% feed disturbances for the ternary glycols (1, 2-PG+ 1, 3-BD+ 1, 4-BD) in a DWC. It showed that CS1 could not deal with the disturbances well while CS2 and CS3 showed a good performance in the face of disturbances. For CS2, three composition controllers were employed to control the purity of products. The dynamic responses showed that the system could get steady within 6 hr and the product purity had small deviations in the face of feed disturbances. For CS3, a temperature controller, two composition controllers, and a flow rate controller were used to control the DWC, in which a composition-flow rate cascade loop was used to control the purity of side stream product. The dynamic responses showed that the system could be steady within 4 hr with small deviations. In comparison with CS2, CS3 had better dynamic responses and all of three products could get steady with smaller deviations, shorter settling time, and smoother responses in most cases.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Disclosure

The manuscript has been previously presented as poster of AIChE.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

A. A. Kiss, S. J. F. Landaeta, and C. A. I. Ferreira, “Towards energy efficient distillation technologies–making the right choice,” Energy, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 531–542, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
H. K. Engelien and S. Skogestad, “Selecting appropriate control variables for a heat-integrated distillation system with prefractionator,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 683–691, 2004.
View at: Google Scholar
J. A. Caballero and I. E. Grossmann, “Synthesis of complex thermally coupled distillation systems including divided wall columns,” AIChE Journal, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 1139–1159, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. J. Halvorsen and S. Skogestad, “Energy efficient distillation,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 571–580, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Donahue, M. Baldea, and R. Bruce Eldridge, “Steady state considerations for designing minimum energy control strategies for a dividing wall distillation column with trace components,” Chemical Engineering and Processing-Process Intensification, vol. 145, Article ID 107641, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Asprion and G. Kaibel, “Dividing wall columns: fundamentals and recent advances,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 139–146, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Dejanović, L. Matijašević, and Ž Olujić, “Dividing wall column—a breakthrough towards sustainable distilling,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 559–580, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Ö Yildirim, A. A. Kiss, and E. Y. Kenig, “Dividing wall columns in chemical process industry: a review on current activities,” Separation and Purification Technology, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 403–417, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Dejanović, H. Jansen, and Ž. Olujić, Dividing Wall Column as Energy Saving Retrofit technology, AIChE Spring Meeting, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2014.
G. Parkinson, “Dividing-wall columns find greater appeal,” Chemical Engineering Progress, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 8–11, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Harmsen, “Process intensification in the petrochemicals industry: drivers and hurdles for commercial implementation,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 70–73, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. C. Van Diggelen, A. A. Kiss, and A. W. Heemink, “Comparison of control strategies for dividing-wall columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 288–307, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Baldea, “From process integration to process intensification,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 81, pp. 104–114, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Donahue, B. J. Roach, J. J. Downs, T. Blevins, M. Baldea, and R. B. Eldridge, “Dividing wall column control: common practices and key findings,” Chemical Engineering and Processing-Process Intensification, vol. 107, pp. 106–115, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Donahue, J. J. Downs, M. Baldea, and R. B. Eldridge, “Managing trace components in a dividing wall distillation column: an experimental study,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 58, no. 28, pp. 12687–12701, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Qian, R. Liu, K. Huang et al., “Comparison of temperature control and temperature difference control for a kaibel dividing wall column,” Processes, vol. 7, no. 10, p. 773, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Wang, N. Yu, M. Chen, L. Cong, and L. Sun, “Composition control and temperature inferential control of dividing wall column based on model predictive control and PI strategies,” Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 1087–1101, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Ling and W. L. Luyben, “New control structure for divided-wall columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 48, no. 13, pp. 6034–6049, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Ling, Z. Cai, H. Wu, J. Wang, and B. Shen, “Remixing control for divided-wall columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 50, no. 22, pp. 12694–12705, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. A. Wolff and S. Skogestad, “Operation of integrated three-product (Petlyuk) distillation columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 2094–2103, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Mutalib and R. Smith, “Operation and control of dividing wall distillation columns: Part 1: degrees of freedom and dynamic simulation,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 308–318, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Serra, A. Espuna, and L. Puigjaner, “Control and optimization of the divided wall column,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 38, no. 4-6, pp. 549–562, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Serra, M. Perrier, A. Espuna, and L. Puigjaner, “Study of the divided wall column controllability: influence of design and operation,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 24, no. 2-7, pp. 901–907, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Serra, M. Perrier, A. Espuna, and L. Puigjaner, “Analysis of different control possibilities for the divided wall column: feedback diagonal and dynamic matrix control,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 25, no. 4-6, pp. 859–866, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. H. Kim, “Structural design and operation of a fully thermally coupled distillation column,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 85, no. 2-3, pp. 289–301, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. Kiss and C. S. Bildea, “A control perspective on process intensification in dividing-wall columns,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 281–292, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. Kiss and R. R. Rewagad, “Energy efficient control of a BTX dividing-wall column,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 2896–2904, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. Kiss and R. M. Ignat, “Enhanced methanol recovery and glycerol separation in biodiesel production–DWC makes it happen,” Applied Energy, vol. 99, pp. 146–153, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Zavala-Guzmán, H. Hernández-Escoto, S. Hernández, and J. G. Segovia-Hernandez, “Conventional proportional–integral (PI) control of dividing wall distillation columns: systematic tuning,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 51, no. 33, pp. 10869–10880, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Dwivedi, I. J. Halvorsen, and S. Skogestad, “Control structure selection for four-product Petlyuk column,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 67, pp. 49–59, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Dwivedi, I. J. Halvorsen, and S. Skogestad, “Control structure selection for three-product Petlyuk (dividing-wall) column,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 64, pp. 57–67, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Tututi-Avila and A. Jiménez-Gutiérrez, “Control of dividing-wall columns via fuzzy logic,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 52, no. 22, pp. 7492–7503, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. J. Wang and J. D. Ward, “Control of three types of dividing wall columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 52, no. 50, pp. 17976–17995, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Tututi-Avila, A. Jiménez-Gutiérrez, and J. Hahn, “Analysis of multi-loop control structures of dividing-wall distillation columns using a fundamental model,” Processes, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 180–199, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Zavala‐Guzmán, H. Hernández‐Escoto, S. Hernández, F. O. Barroso-Munoz, and J. G. Segovia-Hernandez, “Conventional proportional‐integral control of a dividing‐wall distillation column with discrete measurements,” Chemical Engineering & Technology, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 2238–2250, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Tututi-Avila, L. A. Domínguez-Díaz, N. Medina-Herrera, A. Jimenez-Gutierrez, and J. Hahn, “Dividing-wall columns: design and control of a kaibel and a satellite distillation column for BTX separation,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 114, pp. 1–15, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Mutalib, A. O. Zeglam, and R. Smith, “Operation and control of dividing wall distillation columns: Part 2: simulation and pilot plant studies using temperature control,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 319–334, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Strandberg and S. Skogestad, “Stabilizing control of an integrated 4-product kaibel column,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 623–628, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Wang, C. J. Lee, S. S. Jang, and S. S. Shieh, “Plant-wide design and control of acetic acid dehydration system via heterogeneous azeotropic distillation and divided wall distillation,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 45–60, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Buck, C. Hiller, and G. Fieg, “Decentralized temperature control of a pilot dividing wall column,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 167–180, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Ignat and A. Woinaroschy, “Dynamic analysis and controllability of dividing-wall distillation columns,” Chemical Engineering Transactions, vol. 25, pp. 647–652, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Dwivedi, J. P. Strandberg, I. J. Halvorsen, and S. Skogestad, “Steady state and dynamic operation of four-product dividing-wall (Kaibel) columns: experimental verification,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 51, no. 48, pp. 15696–15709, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Kim, M. Lee, and S. Park, “Two-point temperature control structure selection for dividing-wall distillation columns,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 51, no. 48, pp. 15683–15695, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Gupta and N. Kaistha, “Role of nonlinear effects in benzene–toluene–xylene dividing wall column control system design,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 54, no. 38, pp. 9407–9420, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Fan, W. Jiang, and X. Qian, “Comparison of stabilizing control structures for four-product Kaibel column,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 109, pp. 675–685, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Qian, S. Jia, S. Skogestad, and X. Yuan, “Control structure selection for four-product Kaibel column,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 93, pp. 372–381, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Xiaolong, L. Botong, Y. Xigang, L. Yiqing, and Y. Kuo-Ksong, “Application of the dividing wall column to olefin separation in fluidization methanol to propylene (FMTP) process,” Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1069–1078, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Pan, X. Wu, J. Qiu, G. He, and H. Ling, “Pressure compensated temperature control of Kaibel divided-Wall column,” Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 203, pp. 321–332, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Wang and D. S. H. Wong, “Controllability and energy efficiency of a high-purity divided wall column,” Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 1010–1025, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Cho, B. Kim, D. Kim, M. Han, and M. Lee, “Operation of divided wall column with vapor sidedraw using profile position control,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 932–941, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Ling and W. L. Luyben, “Temperature control of the BTX divided-wall column,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 189–203, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Luan, K. Huang, and N. Wu, “Operation of dividing-wall columns. 1. A simplified temperature difference control scheme,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 2642–2660, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Wu, K. Huang, and S. Luan, “Operation of dividing-wall distillation columns. 2. A double temperature difference control scheme,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 52, no. 15, pp. 5365–5383, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Yuan, K. Huang, H. Chen, L. Zhang, and S. Wang, “Asymmetrical temperature control of a BTX dividing-wall distillation column,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 123, pp. 84–98, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Lukač, I. J. Halvorsen, Ž Olujić, and I. Dejanovic, “On controllability of a fully thermally coupled four-product dividing wall column,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 147, pp. 367–377, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Qian, K. Huang, S. Jia et al., “Temperature difference control and pressure-compensated temperature difference control for four-product extended Petlyuk dividing-wall columns,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 146, pp. 263–276, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. R. Rewagad and A. A. Kiss, “Dynamic optimization of a dividing-wall column using model predictive control,” Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 132–142, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Adrian, H. Schoenmakers, and M. Boll, “Model predictive control of integrated unit operations: control of a divided wall column,” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 347–355, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Buck, C. Hiller, and G. Fieg, “Applying model predictive control to dividing wall columns,” Chemical Engineering & Technology, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 663–672, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Rodríguez Hernández and J. A. Chinea-Herranz, “Decentralized control and identified-model predictive control of divided wall columns,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 1582–1592, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. K. Dohare, K. Singh, and R. Kumar, “Modeling and model predictive control of dividing wall column for separation of Benzene–Toluene-o-Xylene,” Systems Science & Control Engineering, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 142–153, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Qian, K. Huang, S. Jia et al., “Composition–temperature cascade control of dividing-wall distillation columns by combining model predictive and proportional–integral controllers,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 4546–4559, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. J. Kim, S. Kim, H. G. Choi, and S. J. Han, “Co-production of biodiesel and bioethanol using psychrophilic microalga Chlamydomonas sp. KNM0029C isolated from Arctic sea ice,” Biotechnology for Biofuels, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 20–13, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Guo, “The global scenario of biofuel production and development,” Practices and Perspectives in Sustainable Bioenergy, Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 29–56, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Ai, M. Zheng, Y. Jiang et al., “Kinetic study on catalytic dehydration of 1, 2-propanediol and 1, 2-butanediol over H-Beta for bio-ethylene glycol purification,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 335, pp. 530–538, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. L. Gascoyne, R. R. Bommareddy, S. Heeb, and N. Malys, “Engineering Cupriavidus necator H16 for the autotrophic production of (R) -1, 3-butanediol,” Metabolic Engineering, vol. 67, pp. 262–276, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Wang, J. Na, X. Li, H. Li, S. Gu, and X. Gao, “Development of a reactive extraction process for enhancing acetalizations of ethylene glycol and 1, 2-butanediol with propyl aldehyde,” Separation and Purification Technology, vol. 267, Article ID 118565, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhong, Y. Wu, J. Zhu, K. Chen, B. Wu, and L. Ji, “Thermodynamics in separation for the ternary system 1, 2-ethanediol+ 1, 2-propanediol+ 2, 3-butanediol,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 53, no. 30, pp. 12143–12148, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhong, Y. Wu, J. Zhu et al., “The distillation process design for the ternary system 1, 2-butanediol+ 1, 4-butanediol+ 2, 3-butanediol,” Separation Science and Technology, vol. 50, no. 16, pp. 150629133318007–2552, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wu, X. Qu, J. Zhu, K. Chen, B. Wu, and L. Ji, “Thermodynamic data for separation of ternary mixture (1, 2-propanediol+ 1, 3-butanediol+ 1, 4-butanediol) by distillation,” Chemical Engineering Communications, vol. 205, no. 7, pp. 947–954, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Zhihui Ma et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

221

Downloads

302

Citations