Comparison of Temperature Control and Temperature Difference Control for a Kaibel Dividing Wall Column

Qian, Xing; Li, Rui; Huang, Kejin; Chen, Haisheng; Yuan, Yang; Zhang, Liang; Wang, Shaofeng

doi:10.3390/pr7100773

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, steady‐state simulations are employed to carry out a sensitivity analysis. Small disturbances of 0.5 % are introduced to the manipulated variables (MV;

\overset{\cdot}{D}

{\overset{\cdot}{S}}_{1}

{\overset{\cdot}{S}}_{2}

{\overset{\cdot}{L}}_{1}

{\overset{\cdot}{L}}_{2}

and

\overset{\cdot}{Q}

) and their respective gains, Δ T /Δ MW , are calculated 36.…”

Section: Control Structures and Dynamic Simulation Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of Control Structures for a Four‐Product Laboratory Multiple Dividing‐Wall Column Using Dynamic Simulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dynamic behavior of a multiple dividing‐wall column pilot plant is evaluated by means of dynamic simulation. Three different control structures are developed or adapted from the literature, which are constrained by the actual design features of the pilot plant column. Since in the present case the design of the column was chosen such that very different mixtures can be separated, it cannot be optimally designed for each of these potential mixtures. Rather, the design focused on the flexibility of the plant. All three investigated control structures were tested on feed flow rate and feed composition disturbance and allowed a robust control of the pilot plant, whereby control structure 2 is slightly better than others in terms of steady‐state deviations and less pronounced fluctuations during the dynamic phase. The transferability of control structure 2 to other variants of multiple dividing‐wall columns is easily possible.

show abstract

“…In this study, steady‐state simulations are employed to carry out a sensitivity analysis. Small disturbances of 0.5 % are introduced to the manipulated variables (MV;

\overset{\cdot}{D}

{\overset{\cdot}{S}}_{1}

{\overset{\cdot}{S}}_{2}

{\overset{\cdot}{L}}_{1}

{\overset{\cdot}{L}}_{2}

and

\overset{\cdot}{Q}

) and their respective gains, Δ T /Δ MW , are calculated 36.…”

Section: Control Structures and Dynamic Simulation Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of Control Structures for a Four‐Product Laboratory Multiple Dividing‐Wall Column Using Dynamic Simulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Distillation, as the most widely applied separation technology [3], is considered in this article. As conventional distillation column normally consumes a large amount of energy [4][5][6][7], it is promising to find an alternative column configuration with lower energy consumption.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of Ternary System 1,2-Ethanediol + 1,3-Propanediol + 1,4-Butanediol by Liquid-Only Transfer Dividing Wall Column

Wu,

Song,

Rao

et al. 2023

Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study focuses on separating a mixture consisting of 1,2-ethanediol (1,2-ED), 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PD), and 1,4-butanediol (1,4-BD). Vapor–liquid equilibrium (VLE) data for 1,2-ED + 1,4-BD and 1,3-PD + 1,4-BD are determined at 101.3 kPa using a modified Rose equilibrium still. The consistency of the VLE data is checked with both Redlich–Kister and Fredenslund tests. The VLE data are fitted by the Wilson, NRTL, and UNIQUAC activity coefficient models. All three models can effectively correlate the VLE data. Then, the separation of the mixture is designed with the NRTL model and its correlated binary interaction parameters. A liquid-only transfer dividing wall column (LDWC) is investigated on the basis of a direct conventional distillation sequence (DCDS). For a fair comparison, both DCDS and LDWC are optimized to minimize total annual cost using sequential iterative optimization procedures. After optimization, LDWC exhibits a 16.87% reduction in total annual cost, while cooling and heating utility consumptions are reduced by 28.40% and 19.24% compared to DCDS.

show abstract

“…It is generally considered that intensi ed processes, like DWC, are more di cult 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][14][15][16][17]. Dynamic control is one of the keys to the operation of DWC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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][52][53][54][55][56]. Although TDC always has better performance than temperature control structure, deviations for product purity still exist.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2022

Journal of Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Comparison of Temperature Control and Temperature Difference Control for a Kaibel Dividing Wall Column

Cited by 9 publications

References 31 publications

Investigation of Control Structures for a Four‐Product Laboratory Multiple Dividing‐Wall Column Using Dynamic Simulation

Investigation of Control Structures for a Four‐Product Laboratory Multiple Dividing‐Wall Column Using Dynamic Simulation

Separation of Ternary System 1,2-Ethanediol + 1,3-Propanediol + 1,4-Butanediol by Liquid-Only Transfer Dividing Wall Column

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About