Computers&em. Engng,Vol. 17, No. 516, pp. 549-560, 1993 0098-l 354193 $6.00 + 0.

00
Printedin Great Britain.All rightsreserved Copyright0 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd

DISTILLATION COLUMN TARGETS

V. R. DHOLE~ and B. LINNHOFF

Centre For Process Integration, Department of Chemical Engineering, UMIST,
Manchester M60 1QD. U.K.

(Final revision received 10 August 1992; received for publication 30 September 1992)

Abstract-This paper relates to the design of distillation columns. In particular, it relates to the optimis-
ation of a base case design. Column optimization involves options such as different reflex ratios, pressures,
side condensing/reboiling and feed preheating/cooling. We need to establish heat loads and temperature
levels for such modifications and identify the best combined options. The paper presents a methodology
based on a combination of thermodynamics and practical aspects of column modification. The method-
ology gives the engineer targets for design options ahead of design. In addition, it provides targets for
the best combination of options.
Alongside heat load and temperature targets, the methodology clarifies the effect of design modifications
on column capital cost, also ahead of design. The methodology is applicable to nonideal multicomponent
systems and complex distillation configurations. There are downstream applications involving distillation
c&nnn integration in the overall prockes and column sequencing. The-methodology has b&n tested in
industrial applications involving ethylene, LNG and refinery columns.

1. INTRODUCTION The present paper uses the understanding of the

1.1. The problem
The paper addresses the problem identifying
appropriate column design modifications with respect
to energy consumption for a stand-alone column and
its integration with the background process.
1.2. Column Grand Composite Curve (minimum
thermodynamic condition)
The concept of minimum thermodynamic condi-
tion (MTC) for a distillation column has been widely
reported in the literature (see Section 1.4 for a litera-
ture review). This condition pertains to reversible
column operation of zero thermodynamic loss. The
MTC for a binary separation can be described using
a temperatureenthalpy profile as shown in Fig. 1
(Benedict, 1947; Flower and Jackson, 1964; Fonyo,
1974b; Naka et al., 1980; Ishida and Ohno, 1983;
Kaibel, 1987; Ho and Keller, 1987). The profile
indicates that, for MTC, reboiling and condensing
loads are distributed over the temperature range of
the column. The profile can be used to identify scope
for the introduction of side condensing or side reboil-
ing modifications as shown in Fig. 1. The profile is
termed here the Column Grand Composite Curve
(CGCC). Recently, procedures for obtaining the
CGCC for multicomponent separations have also been
reported in the literature (Franklin and Wilkinson,
1982; Kaibel, 1987; Terranova and Westerberg, 1989).
tAuthor to whom all correspondence should be addressed.
MTC and the concept of the CGCC as a basis to set
targets for various stand-alone column modifications
and for column integration
1.3. Column integration
A column modification carried out in isolation from
its background process may lead to inappropriate
designs on an overall basis (Linnhoff et al., 1983).
Any thermal modification of the column should
consider the heat sources and sinks in the background
process, i.e. the column needs to be integrated with
the background process. Pinch analysis offers a sys-
tematic procedure for column integration. Figure 2a
describes the approach for a case involving three
distillation columns. Each column can be represented
by a T-H box as shown. For simplicity, the
reboiler and condenser loads of the individual
columns have been assumed equal. The objective is
to reduce the temperature overlap of the column
boxes. This will increase heat recovery between
columns thus reducing the overall utility demand.
Given the overlap of the boxes in Fig. 2a, it would
seem appropriate to increase the pressure for column
A and to introduce a side condenser for column B.
However, Fig. 2b contrasts the overlap of boxes
with that of profiles. Considering the CGCCs it
would seem appropriate to introduce a side reboiler
on column B and to introduce a side reboiler on
column C. The CGCCs give different-and better
information compared to simple boxes. Thus,
the CGCC would seem important not only for single

549
 550 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

Side
Reboiler ; Reboiler

Condenser
w Condenser -
H H

Fig. 1. The concept of Column Grand Composite Curve (CGCC).

T (C)
T (C)

t
170

130 * increase pressure (A) 130 Introduce side

reboiler (B)
* Introduce side
condenser (B) Introduce side
80 80
reboiler (C)

I
, I I
30 40 70 k (MW)

Overlap of boxes Overlap of profiles

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. CGCC for column integration.

00 Stages

00 Side Exchangers

Fig. 3. Minimum thermodynamic condition (MTC) for a binary column.

 Distillation column targets 551

column modification but also for column integration.

Note that the enthalpy axis (as shown in Fig. 2) is
a relative axis. Therefore, the CGCC can be drawn
left-to-right or right-to-left as shown in Fig. 2b. This
flexibility is particularly useful in identifying column
integration opportunities.

1.4. Literature review: MTC and CGCC

1.4. I. Binary distillation. Several publications have
been reported on the MTC for binary distillation and
for generating the corresponding CGCC (Benedict,
1947; Flower and Jackson, 1964; Fonyo, 1974b;
Naka et al., 1980; King, 1980; Fitxmorris and Mah,
1980; Ishida and Ohno, 1983; Kaibel, 1987; Ho
and Keller, 1987). Figure 3 illustrates the MTC for
a binary distillation. The column will require infinite
stages and infinitely many side exchangers. The
operating line for each stage will be coincident with
the equilibrium curve and thus the operating and
the equilibrium curves will overlap on all points
(King, 1980). Hence, the general approach employed
for evaluating the CGCC involves simultaneously
solving the operating line equations and the equi-
librium line equations which is a relatively simple task
for binary systems due to the small dimensionality of
the problem.
1.4.2. Multicomponent distillation. The MTC for
multicomponent separation has been examined by
Fonyo (1974a), Franklin and Wilkinson (1982) and
Kaibel (1987, 1988), among others. One of the
important observations regarding MTC for multi-
component distillation (in contrast to that of binary)
is that the sharpness of separation is greatly limited.
Within a single reversible column only the heaviest
component can be removed completely from the
overhead product and the lightest from the bottoms
product. In other words, each column section can
separate only one component--either the lightest or
the heaviest. Certain sharp separations can be ob-
tained reversibly by linking several multicomponent
reversible columns. Fonyo (1974a) identifies one such
a scheme for a four-component separation as
shown in Fig. 4. However, for many practical multi-
component separation tasks it is impossible to devise
a scheme for completely reversible separation. An
example is a four-component mixture to be separated
into two products each with two components
(Franklin and Wilkinson, 1982).
As regards the generation of CGCC from the
MTC for multicomponent systems, there are several
previous publications. Franklin and Wilkinson (1982)
propose an N-component model. The CGCC is ob-
taincd for each of the columns in a reversible scheme
such as shown in Fig. 4. These CGCCs are then
added together to obtain an overall CGCC for the
Fig. 4. MTC for a four-component separation (Fonyo,
1974a).
reversible scheme. Terranova and Westerberg also
propose an N-component model and adopt a similar
approach to Franklins and Wilkinsons. They use
equations based on flash calculations to simultane-
ously solve the equilibrium and the component mass
balance equations for all components to obtain the
CGCC. However, they claim that such a CGCC can
be obtained for any multicomponent separation. This
does not seem to agree with the known limitations on
sharpness for a reversible multicomponent separation.
Fonyo (1974a) and Kaibel (1987) suggest a slightly
simpler approach involving light and heavy key
models. The light and heavy keys are the lightest and
the heaviest components, respectively. They obtain
the CGCC for individual columns in the reversible
scheme using this model.
1.5. Problems with current procedures
Within the scientific and the industrial literature
very few practical applications have been reported
using the concept of CGCC. One of the reasons is the
difficulty involved in obtaining the profile. Most
procedures for multicomponent mixtures (Franklin
and Wilkinson, 1982; Fonyo, 1974a; Kaibel, 1987)
rely on a reversible scheme (such as Fig. 4) for a given
separation. However, for many industrial applica-
tions involving sharp separations such a scheme is
impossible to obtain as mentioned earlier. In these
situations, the procedures do not provide practical
guidelines. Even when a reversible scheme can be
constructed, the procedures require iterations for
552 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

Losses due to
l Sharp separation
0 Chosen column
ABCD
- configuration
b
l Pressure drop

CD

Actual column Practical near minimum

thermodynamic condition

Fig. 5. Practical near-minimum thermodynamic condition (PNMTC).

relative volatilities or compositions which can
tedious. The procedure suggested by Teranova and
Westerberg (1989) does not require a reversible
scheme, however, it is not clear whether the model
satisfies the sharp separation limitations. The pro-
cedure also requires iterations for relative volatilities
and a separate evaluation of minimum reflux and
bubble point calculations. To bring the current
models into more realistic domains involving variable
relative volatilities, would make them too difficult for
practical application.
In the literature, the interactions between various
column design modifications such as feed preheating/
cooling, side condensing/reboiling and reflux changes
are not clearly discussed. Furthermore, the trade-offs
between energy benefits due to these modifications
and column capital cost are hard to assess ahead
of design. The CGCC developed by Terranova and
Westerberg (1989) evaluates the effect of different
feed vapour fractions. However it requires the iterative
procedure for the CGCC to be repeated for different
feed conditions which can be cumbersome.
be of column design and modification. These losses
include inevitable feed losses, losses due to sharp
separation, chosen distillation configuration (e.g.
multiple products, single column, side stripper etc.),
pressure drop losses, etc. The column at PNMTC will
still require infinite stages and infinite side exchangers
as shown in Fig. 5.
2.2. Generating the CGCC
The new approach proposed in this paper utilises
results from an already converged column simulation.
Normally the outputs from simulations provide
molar flows and compositions on a stage-by-stage
basis. Let us consider a light and heavy key model.
By key components we mean the two main separating
components in the feed mixture whose separation is
specified. The more volatile of these components is
the light key and the less volatile is the heavy key
(King, 1980; Kister, 1992). As a close approximation
to PNMTC, we simultaneously solve the equilibrium

2. PROPOSED APPROACH

2.1. Practical near -minimum thermodynamic condition

Most industrial columns have certain inevitable

losses or inefficiencies. In order to set realistic targets
for the design modifications of these columns, we
need to allow for these losses. In this section, we I I Equilibrium Line

develop a practical near-minimum thermodynamic

SIMULATION
condition (PNMTC) for a base case or actual
column. Figure 5 illustrates the PNMTC. The
PNMTC relates to a minimum loss condition after Fig. 6. The proposed approach utilises stage-by-stage
accepting the inevitable losses due to the practicalities compositions from a previously converged simulation.
 Distillation column targets 553

and the operating line equations for the key compon- Where G* and L* represent the molar flows of
ents. Figure 6 illustrates the operating line equations the equilibrium vapour and liquid streams. After
for light and heavy keys. For equilibrium compositions calculating Xo,_ and HLtin, we can set up enthalpy
we use the stage-by-stage compositions as provided balances at each of the stage temperatures and
by the simulator output (asterisked in Fig. 6). The evaluate the net enthalpy deficit (Hdcf) at each of these
compositions of liquid and vapour streams emerging temperatures (see Fig. 7a). Thus for an envelope
from the same stage are the equilibrium compositions before the feed stage we obtain:
at the stage temperature. Thus in order to solve the
ffdcf = %, - ci,,. + HD 7 (3)
equilibrium line and the operating line equations
simultaneously, all we need to do is to incorporate the and for an envelope at and after the feed stage we
equilibrium compositions of the vapour and liquid obtain:
streams emerging from the same stage into our mass
ndef = w,in - &,in + cnD - %ed). (4)
balance equations. i.e.
Figure 7b demonstrates how the individual enthalpy
G,, Y,* - Lti,,X; = D,,
deficits are cascaded to construct the CGCC. The
Gtin Y; - L,,X;: = DH . (1) values of the stage temperatures (T,, T, etc.) and the
corresponding heat deficits [H,,Al), &&) etc.] are
These equations establish the minimum vapour
flow (Gmi,,) and the liquid flow (L,,) at the stage
temperature.
In order to obtain the temperature-enthalpy
representation for PNMTC, we need to express
the minimum vapour and liquid flows in terms of
enthalpies. Usually simulation outputs also provide
stage-by-stage vapour and liquid enthalpy values. As
mentioned earlier, the vapour and the liquid streams
emerging from the same stage (asterisked in Fig. 6)
are in equilibrium with each other. The enthalpies
of these equilibrium vapour and liquid streams are
termed here as WE and W,*, respectively. The
enthalpies for the minimum vapour and liquid flows
(HGminand H,.) are obtained from ff,$ and H,t by
direct molar proportionality, i.e.

Ho,i. = NE(G,inIG *),

&_,i. = K!tLil~*). (2) Fig. 7a. Evaluating enthalpy deficit at a stage.

Fig. 7b. Constructing the CGCC from stagewise enthalpy deficits.

554 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

Stage

Reboiler Reboiler

Condenser Condenser

Single converged Column grand composite Column grand composite

simulation (T-H) (stage-H)
Fig. 8. The proposed approach obtains the CGCC from a single converged simulation.

plotted in the T-H dimension as shown. The algor-
ithm used for developing the cascade is identical to
the problem table algorithm introduced by Linnhoff
and Flower (1978). The feed enthalpy strongly influ-
ences the shape of the CGCC near the feed stage.
The CGCC usually shows a pinch point near the feed
stage.
We are ready so summa&e the procedure for
obtaining the CGCC. We start from a converged
simulation. We first obtain the minimum vapour and
liquid flows, at each stage temperature, by solving the
two simultaneous equations (1). These minimum
Xows are then expressed as equivalent enthalpy flows
to obtain the net heat deficit at the stage temperature.
The heat deficits are cascaded in order to obtain the
CGCC. The CGCC can alternatively be plotted as
stage number vs enthalpy (Fig. 8). This version is
particularly useful for identifying the appropriate
feed condition.
The procedure here has been described for a simple
column involving a single feed and two products. It
is easily extended for columns involving multiple
feeds and products and for complex column arrange-
ments (Dhole, 1991). As regards number of compon-
ents, the description here considered a single choice
of light and heavy keys. The procedure can be applied
to different choices of key components in different
sections of the column or to several components
grouped together as light and heavy keys. Grouped
components are particularly useful for refinery
columns. The separating light and heavy key com-
ponents can be identified from the stagewise compos-
&ions (obtained from simulation output). The grouped
light and heavy key compositions are evaluated by
summing the light and heavy key compositions,
respectively. These grouped key compositions are
then used in equation (1) to obtain G,, and Lmin
values, the remaining procedure remains unchanged.
An approach for an N-component model has also
been developed (Dhole, 1991). However, even the
simple model described here is useful for many
practical applications.
2.3. Use of the CGCC
The CGCC is readily used for targeting for
different possible column modifications.
Figure 9 describes the targeting procedure.
A horizontal distance between the CGCC pinch
point and the vertical axis represents the scope
for reduction in reflux ratio (Fig. 9a). The CGCC
pinch point indicates the minimum reflux condition
for the column. As we reduce the reflux ratio, the
CGCC will move towards the vertical axis, thus
reducing the reboiler as well as the condenser
load.
The next modification to consider is feed condi-
tioning. Inappropriate feed condition usually causes
a sharp enthalpy change in the profile near the feed
location. For example, a feed which is excessively
subcooled, causes sudden quenching. This will
result in a sharp enthalpy change on the reboiler side.
Such a sharp enthalpy change is particularly easy to
see in the stage-enthalpy representation. As shown
in Fig. 9b, the extent of sharp enthalpy change on
the reboiler side determines the approximate heat
load for feed preheating. Analogous arguments apply
for feed cooling. Successful feed preheating and cool-
ing will reduce the reboiler and condenser loads,
respectively.
After feed conditioning, we consider side con-
densing/reboiling. Figure 9c describes CGCCs which
show potential for side condensing and reboiling.
Feed conditioning always offers a more moderate
temperature level than side condensing/reboiling.
 Distillation column targets 555

Reflux
Modification

Stage
Reboiler

Feed
Conditioning

CGCC (Stage-H) CGCC (Temp-H)

(b)

Side
Condensing
/Reboiling
Condenser H
CGCC (Temp-H)
Targeting for side Targeting for side
-condensing -reboiling

Fig. 9. Targeting for various column modifications using the CGCC.

Also, feed conditioning is external to the column appropriate feed stage location should be identified
unlike side condensing/reboiling. Thus the sequence before targeting for any column modification.
for considering different column modifications is
2.4. Column Composite Curves (CCC)
recommended as follows:
So far, we have considered column modifications
1. Reflux and pressure modifications.
mainly from an energy standpoint. Modifications
2. Feed preheating/cooling.
were aimed at reducing the excess driving forces in
3. Side condensing/reboiling.
the column. How will the modifications affect the
While setting the targets for the above-mentioned number of stages? We will now attempt to relate
modifications it is assumed that the feed stage driving forces in the column to the number of stages.
location for the column has been appropriately Figure 10a shows the driving force for a stage at
chosen beforehand. Inappropriate feed positioning temperature T2_ Vapour rises from the lower stage
could cause sharp enthalpy changes in the CGCC at temperature T, and mixes with the liquid coming
similar to feed preheating and cooling. Therefore, from the previous stage at temperature T,. The
 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

Fig. 1Oa. Enthalpy change along a single stage.

Reboiler

1Condenser

Column Composite CurveS

Fig. IOb. Column Composite Curves (CCC).

&boiler

H Ii
Cokarm Grand Cofnposite Curve Column Composite Curves
Fig. I 1. The CGCC and CCC relate to each other as in pinch analysis. The CCC can be constructed from
the CGCC.
 Distillation column targets 557

mixing results in the transfer of enthalpy from the are taken into account. Since the approach directly
vapour to the liquid stream and consequently loss of takes the equilibrium compositions from a simulator,
heat and mass transfer driving forces. The tempera- the various nonldealities are considered beforehand.
ture of the mixture is T2 which is our stage tempera- This offers an improvement over the current methods
ture. The construction is repeated for each stage. The which are mainly based on Underwood-type relative
overall construction is shown in Fig. lob. We term volatility models.
this plot the Column Composite Curves (CCC). The targeted heat loads and temperatures have been
The CCC depict the distribution of stages in different found to be about 70-80% effective. The accuracy
sections of the column. The region between the can bc further improved by considering different keys
vapour and the liquid composites represents com- in different sections of the column. In the case of a
bined heat and mass transfer loss in the column large number of components (for example, refinery
(Dhole, 1991). As we increase the number of stages, columns) or low concentrations of the key com-
the CCC will become tighter, reducing the heat and ponents, higher accuracy is obtained by grouping the
mass transfer loss in the column and vice versa when lighter and heavier components. These component
we reduce the number of stages. Thus, the CCC groups are then considered as light and heavy keys
provide a link between driving forces and the number as previously discussed in Section 2.2
of stages in the column. The approach is simple to use and is easily imple-
mented through simple software either stand-alone or
2.5. Relating CCC with CGCC within a simulator environment. More importantly,
it identifies the most promising column modification
How are the CCC related to the CGCC? The
options prior to any additional simulations. The
relationship is identical to that between pinch analysis
approach provides insights into energy as well as
Composite Curves and pinch analysis Grand Com-
capital cost implications_ The interactions between
posite Curves (Fig. 11). The horizontal distance be-
various options for modifications are clearly under-
tween the CGCC and the vertical axis is the same as
stood. The approach has been tested on ethylene,
the horizontal distance between the CCC. The area
LNG, refinery and organic process columns with
between the CCC equals the area between the CGCC
promising results. Typically 10-l 5 % power savings
and the temperature axis (shown as a dotted area)
have been achieved in the subambient processes such
and represents heat and mass transfer loss. The CCC
as ethylene and LNG (Dhole 1991). In the case of
are easily constructed from the CGCC as shown
above ambient applications such as refineries about
in Fig. 11. CGCC provides the energy targets for
10% fuel savings have been observed due to the use
column modifications while CCC enable the designer
of column targeting. These savings have resulted
to assess the effect of modifications on the number of
from identification of appropriate column modifica-
stages, i.e. on capital cost. A modification in a section
tions and improved column integration Very simply,
where the CCC show tight driving forces implies
the approach enables the designer to target for
high capital cost penalty. The combined use of
modifications accurately and easily prior to column
CGCC and CCC provide an assessment of both
and process design.
energy and capital cost implications of proposed
column modifications in the targeting mode. Together,
the CGCC and the CCC identify the most promising 3. EXAMPLE
design options ahead of design.
We will now demonstrate the principles of
column targeting using an example column both
2-6. Comparison with previous work for stand-alone modification and for process
In comparison with previous work on CGCC integration.
(Fonyo, 1974a; Kaibel, 1987; Franklin and Wilkinson,
1982; Terranova and Westerberg, 1989), the current Table I. Feed and product specifications for the example problem
approach provides a more practical, simple and reli- Top Bottom
pr0pCl-tiC.S Feed product product
able approach. We do not need to devise any revers-
Molar flow (kmol h - ) 1000.0 398.0 602.0
ible scheme for the separation (such as shown in Pressure @Pa) 2JXI.O 200.0 200.0
Fig. 4). There are no limitations on the sharpness of Temperature (C) 100.0 140.3 203.8
Vapour fraction 0.00 I.00 0.00
separation. So long as the column can be simulated, Mole fractions
we can obtain the profiles and the targets for the a-HCptanC 0.2OOOoo 0.502542 0.000@33
n-octane 0.2ooooo 0.487419 0.01oOOO
column. The approach considers an actual column n-Nonane 0.01OOw 0.325601
cor&uration/slmulation. Various inevitable losses t#-DCCaW iz%zE O.Otnw38 0.332186
PI-Cl5 0.2wooO o.cHMOOO 0.33221 I
due to the feed, pressure drop, sharp separations etc.
558 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

(a) Base Case

I I

(b) Reflux Modification

I Qcond=l8.6
210
202
32 194
28 186
178
& 24
20
E
170
d
co 16 f 162
12
8

Enthalpy

(c) Feed Preheating

Qcond=26
210 210 _
202 202 c
104
186
170
170

-1l-l
0 9 18 27 36 45 54 63 72 81 90 0 180 360 540 720 9oc

Enthalpy Enthalpy

(d) Side Condensing and Reboiling

Qcond=lQ.G
140.3%

147C
Q side

180C
Q side= 5

203.8%
Qreb=33.2 1

(Temperatures: C: Enthalples: MMBtu/h)

Fig. 12. Example problem: single-column modification.

3.1. SingIe coiwrvl existing column (with 18 stages) along with its CGCC
and CCC. The CGCC shows scope for improvement
Table 1 shows the feed and the product specifica- in the reflux ratio by about 20-22MMBtu h-l.
tions for the example column. Figure 12a shows the Correspondingly, the CCC show a large driving
 Distillation column targets 559

force loss throughout the column. By increasing the whether for stand alone column design or for process
number of stages to 30 the reflux ratio is improved integration.
by 21 MMBtu h-l. Figure 12b shows the resulting
coiumn after reflux modification along with its 4. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE
column profiles. The CGCC has moved closer to the
Starting from a converged simulation we are able
vertical axis due to the reflux improvement and
to develop column profiles for columns with multiple
the CCC indicate reduction in the driving force loss.
components, complex column configurations and
The CGCC shows a sharp enthalpy change on the
variable relative volatilities. The profiles identify
reboiler side (about 25 MMBtu h-l). This indicates
appropriate column modifications and essentially set
scope for feed preheating. Although the CCC have
targets in terms of heat loads and temperatures for
become tighter, the driving force distribution is not
the modifications. The designer is easily made aware
uniform. On the reboiler side, the CCC could he made
of energy cost and capital cost implications. The
tighter while on the condenser side the CCC could
combined use of column targets and pinch analysis
he made wider. Based on the column targets,
curves for the background process enhances the
we introduce feed preheating of 25 MMBtu h-.
reliability of column integration in comparison to
Figure I2c shows the simulation results after the
conventional pinch analysis.
feed preheating modification and the corresponding
column profiles. The reboiler load is reduced by
NOMENCLATURE
18 MMBtu h- indicating that the feed preheating
CGCC = Column Grand Composite Curve
modification has been effective. The CCC have
CCC = Column Composite Curves
hecome tighter. However, the driving force distri- D, = Top draw heavy key molar flow
bution has become more uniform. The use of driving D,_ = Top draw light key molar flow
G= Actual molar vapour flow
force along the column has improved. The CGCC
G,, = Minimum molar vapour flow
shows further scope for side condensing and side G* = Molar flow of equilibrium vapour stream
reboiling of 10 and 15 MMBtu h- respectively. HD = Enthalpy of top draw
Accordingly, we introduce a side reboiler and a W,, = Enthalpy deficit
H fssd= Enthalpy of feed
side condenser modification. Figure 12d shows the Hz = Enthalpy of equilibrium vapour stream
simulation results. The simulation results confirm w GE+,. =
Enthalpy of minimum vapour flow
= Enthalpy of equilibrium liquid stream
the targets.
Ht
17~~~.= Enthalpy of minimum liquid flow
L = Actual molar liquid flow
3.2. Process integration Lmin= Minimum mola; liquid flow
MTC = Minimum thermodvnamic condition
We now consider the background process.
PNMTC = Practical near minimum thermodynamic con-
Figure 13a shows the overlap of the example dition
column (as a box) and the background process. X, = Mole fraction of heavy key in liquid stream
Again, note that the CGCC has been plotted in X+, = Equilibrium mole fraction of heavy key in
liquid stream
the reverse enthalpy direction (from right to left). XL = Mole fraction of light key in liquid stream
One might reduce the column pressure to avoid Xf = Equilibrium mole fraction of light key in liquid.
stream
overlap. However, considering the CGCC, we
Y, = Mole fraction of heavy key in vapour stream
identify reflux and preheating modifications as Y$ = Equilibrium mole fraction of heavy key in
appropriate. The use of column targets makes vapour stream
Y, = Mole fraction of tight key in vapour stream
the designer fully aware of modification potential,
Yt = Equilibrium mole fraction of light key in vapour
stream

REFERENCES

Benedict M., Multistage separation processes. Trans AlChE

43, 41 (1947).
Dhole V. R., Distillation column integration and overall
design of subambient plants. Ph.D. Thesis, UMIST,
Manchester, U.K. (1991).
Fitzmorris R. E. and R. S. H. Mah, Improving distillation
column design using thermodynamic availability analysis.
AfChE Jl 26, 265-273 (1980).
Flower J. R. and M. A. Jackson, Energy requirements in the
separation of mixtures by distillation. Truns IChemE 42,
80x rt3pmmlonH
Pfufile rem& 249-258 (1964).
Fonyo 2.. Thermodynamic analysis of rectification I.
(a) 04 Reversible model of rectification. Inf. Chem. Engng 14
Fig. 13. Example problem: process integration. 18-27 (1974a).
560 V. R. DHOLE and B. LINNHOFF

Fonyo Z., Thermodynamic analysis of rectification. II. King C. J., Separution Processes. McGraw-Hill, New York
Finite cascade models. Inf. Chem. Engng 14, 203-210 (1980).
(1974b). Kister H. Z., Distillation-Design. McGraw-Hill, New York
Franklin N. L. and M. B. Wilkinson, Reversibility in the (1992).
separation of multicomponent mixtures. Trans IChemE Linnhoff B. and J. R. Flower, Synthesis of heat exchanger
60, 276-282 (1982). networks I. Systematic generation of energy optimal
Ho F. G. and G. E. Keller, Process Integration. Recent networks. A/C!& Jl 24, 633642 (1978).
Developments in Chemical Process and Plant Design Linnhoff B., H. Dunford and R. Smith, Heat integration of
(Y. A. Liu, H. A. McGee and W. G. Epperly, Eds). Wiley, distillation columns into overall processes. Chem. Engng
New York (1987). Sci. 38, 1175-l 188 (1983).
Ishida M. and T. Ohno, Application of energy-direction Naka Y., M. Terashita, S. Hayashiguchi and T. Takamatsu,
factor diagram for analysis of a distillaticn column. An intermediate heating and cooling method for a
J. Chem. Engng. Japan 16, 281-287 (1983). distillation column. J. Chem. Engng Japan, 13, 123-129
Kaibel G., Ph.D. Thesis, Technical University Munich (1980).
(1987). Terranova 8. E. and A. W. Westerberg, Temperatureheat
Kaibel G., Distiilation column arrangements with low diagrams for complex columns. 1. Intercooled/interheated
energy consumption. IChemE Symp. Ser. 109, 43-59 distillation columns. Inr. Engng Chem. Res. 28, 1374-1379
(1988). (1989).