See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308865618

Control of propylene - propane distillation process using Unisim® design

Conference Paper · October 2015

DOI: 10.1109/ICSTCC.2015.7321383

CITATIONS READS

4 258

3 authors, including:

Cristian Pătrăşcioiu Marian Popescu

Petroleum - Gas University of Ploiesti Petroleum - Gas University of Ploiesti
66 PUBLICATIONS 148 CITATIONS 44 PUBLICATIONS 148 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Production Potential Resumption of Abandoned Oil Reservoirs View project

ROKIDAIR – Towards a better protection of children against air pollution threats in the urban areas of Romania View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cristian Pătrăşcioiu on 21 August 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2015 19th International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC), October 14-16, Cheile Gradistei, Romania

Control of Propylene – Propane Distillation Process

using Unisim® Design

Cristian Patrascioiu, Cao Minh Anh, Marian Popescu

Department of Automatic Control, Computers and Electronics
Petroleum – Gas University of Ploiesti
Ploiesti, Romania
cpatrascioiu@upg-ploiesti.ro

Abstract—The paper addresses the control problem of a

binary distillation processes. There are analyzed the quality
specifications of separated products and also the distributed and
multivariable character of the process. The robustness of the
control system lies in its simplicity versus the investment. The
paper presents the studies made for development and numerical
testing of three types of control structures for propylene-propane
separation process: the feedback control structure, the
feedforward control structure and the optimal control structure.
Keywords—distillation process; feedback control; feedforward
control; PI control algorithm; Unisim® Design
I. INTRODUCTION
Distillation processes are very complex mainly because of
two features: the character of distributed parameter system and
the character of multivariable system. From distillation
processes takes part binary distillation, some typical examples
being the separation of ethylene-ethane or propylene-propane
mixtures. From dynamic point of view, these are 2x2
multivariable processes. For these processes are highlighted
the following groups of variables: outputs (compositions of
distillate and bottom product), disturbances (feed flowrate and
composition), manipulated variables (reflux flowrate, bottom
product flowrate). The distillate composition (ethylene or
propylene stream) is a hard target and the bottom product
composition (ethane or propane stream) is a soft target. A hard
target refers to a fixed value of the specification (propylene
concentration in distillate xD), and a soft target indicates a
range of variation for the specification (propylene
concentration in bottom product xB) [1].
Some methods to develop composition control structures
are based on using transfer functions to describe process
dynamics on different operating ranges and to build
accordingly feedback control algorithms [2]. Other methods
use nonlinear models of the process and feedback control
based on IMC algorithms [3], feedforward control algorithms
[4] or optimal control [5].
The authors have developed control structures which may
ensure the distillate specification at minimum cost. This
objective can be achieved by feedback, feedforward or optimal
control structures. In order to develop such structures different
methods can be used.
II. CONTROL STRUCTURES DESIGN ELEMENTS
Control structure design uses the following elements:
Relative Gain Array (RGA), control laws, steady state and
dynamic simulation.
A. Relative Gain Array
The first step of the control structure design is represented
by an adequate selection of the control agents used for
separated products quality control. A powerful tool for the
analysis of theoretical structures for separated products quality
control is the Relative Gain Array (RGA). The elements of
RGA are calculated using the relations developed by Shinskey
[6]. For binary distillation are available the pairs of control
agents L-V, L-B, D-V, D-B/L, D-V/B, S-B/L, S-V/B. Usually,
the following criteria are used for the selection of control
agents [7]:
a) The value of the relative gains as close to 1 as
possible;
b) Use of the lowest flowrate (B or D) as control agent.
RGA elements are calculated based on a steady-state
simulation of the process using Unisim® Design simulation
environment [8].
B. Control laws
The second instrument used for the control structure
design is the control law. According to this criterion, the
control structures for the quality of separated products from a
distillation column can be with feedback or feedforward
action. In the first case it must be utilize a composition
transducer for distillate. In the second case there are a few
situations that can be studied:
a) System based on the rejection of feed flowrate
disturbance;
b) System based on the rejection of both disturbances
(feed flowrate and composition);
c) System based on the combined actions of the two
control laws.
It is obvious that the investment increases from the first to
the last case.

978-1-4799-8481-7/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE 747

C. Steady state and dynamic simulation
Performance testing of the proposed control structures for
the propylene-propane separation column was done by
dynamic simulation using Unisim® Design simulation
environment [8]. An exhaustive treatment of this problem can
be found in [9]. Basically, the following steps must be
completed: steady-state configuration of the separation
process; implementation of the selected structure; tuning of
the basic controllers; implementation of the quality control
system and tuning of the related controllers.
Based on the previously described design elements, there
were developed and tested three control systems for quality of
the separated products from the propylene-propane distillation
column.

III. THE PROPYLENE-PROPANE FEEDBACK CONTROL STRUCTURE

Although the propylene-propane separation process has a
multivariable nature (2x2), the quality specifications required
for the two separated products allow the treatment of the
Fig. 1. The feedback L-B control structure.
process as a system consisting of two monovariable quality
control systems. For this distillation process the quality Fig. 2 shows the diagram of the simulator obtained by
specification for distillate is rigid and requires an automatic implementing the feedback control structure. The control
control system, while the specification for the bottom product systems have the following meanings: FIC-100 – feed
is flexible and allows the process operation within a range. flowrate controller, PIC-100 – top pressure controller, LIC-
A first analysis of this process involved the use of Relative 100 – reflux drum level controller, LIC-101 – reboiler level
Gain Array, the values for different control structures being controller, FIC-101 – bottom product flowrate controller, AIC
presented in Table I. – distillate composition controller. All controllers implement
the PI algorithm.
TABLE I. VALUES OF THE RELATIVE GAINS FOR DIFFERENT CONTROL At this point, the dynamic simulator controllers must be
STRUCTURES tuned, the values of the tuning parameters (Kc – proportional
Structure RGA value Structure name RGA value gain and Ti – reset) are presented in Table II.
name
ΛDV 0.841 ΛLD 0.165
TABLE II. CONTROL SYSTEM CONFIGURATION PARAMETERS
ΛDL/B 1.019 ΛLB 1.010
ΛDV/B 1.042 ΛLV 20.831 Parameter Ti
Kc
ΛLL/B 0.910 ΛSL/B 0.942 Controller [min]
ΛLV_B 0.828 ΛSV/B 1.015 FIC-100 0.25 0.20
FIC-101 0.20 0.25
ΛSD 0.241 ΛDS 0.758
FIC-102 0.25 2
ΛSV 2.435 PIC-100 2 0.1
LIC-100 0.05 25
The significance of the symbols used in Table 1 is: L – LIC-101 0.5 0.75
reflux flowrate; B – bottom product flowrate; D – distillate AIC-100 1.2 25
flowrate; V – boilup flowrate; S – separation factor. The
analysis of the mentioned structures showed that the L-B
structure is the most adequate for industrial implementation of The feedback control structure was simulated for the
a robust control system for separated products quality [7]. Fig. variation of the feed flowrate (main disturbance) from 50.62
1 shows the control structure of top and bottom compositions m3/h to 55 m3/h. The dynamic of the propylene concentration
using L and B flowrates as control agents. in distillate and bottom product are illustrated in Fig. 3 and
Fig. 4. The conclusions are in the following:
Performance testing of the proposed control structures for
the propylene-propane separation column was done by a) The control structure ensures the control of xD
dynamic simulation using Unisim® Design simulation (propylene concentration in distillate);
environment.
b) The response time of the composition controller is
very high, which causes poor performance of concentration
control system;
c) The propylene concentration in the bottom product is
allowed to evolve relatively free.

748
.
Fig. 2. Dynamic simulation diagram of the feedback L-B control structure
Fig. 3. Dynamic response of the propylene concentration in distillate.
Fig. 4. Dynamic response of the propylene concentration in bottom product.
IV. FEEDFORWARD CONTROL STRUCTURE
The feedforward composition control structure has a
hierarchical structure with 2 levels: the first level consists of
the L-B control structure, and the second level contains the
feedforward controller used for quality control of the two
separated products from the distillation column, Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. The feedforward control structure.
The set-points of the second control level are the
concentration of propylene in distillate and bottom product,
the measured disturbance is the feed flowrate F, and the
outputs of this control level are set-points for the reflux
flowrate (L) and bottom product flowrate (B) control systems
situated at the first hierarchical level.
749
 The mathematical model of the controller is composed of Ls = R(F − Bs ) ; [kmol/h]. (7)
two subsystems: a subsystem for calculation of steady-state
controller outputs (Ls , Bs ) and one for the dynamic outputs The significance of the notations from relations (1) – (7) is
(L(t ), B(t )) . presented in the following:
− α - average relative volatility of the light component in
A. Steady-state subsystem relation to the heavy component;
This controller component is based on Fenske-Gilliland-
− θ - parameter in Underwood relation;
Underwood relations [10, 11]:
− Rmin – minimum reflux ratio;

xi − xF − N – number of theoretical liquid-vapor equilibria

Bs = F D ; [kmol/h] (1) (theoretical trays);
i
xD − x Bi
− Nmin – minimum number of theoretical equilibria;
− R – reflux ratio;
 xi 1 − xi  − A - parameter in Eduljee relation;
ln  D i ∗ i B 
1− x xD 
N min =  D ; (2) − i – index associated to set-point of the control system.
ln α
B. Dynamic control subsystem
The dynamic component of the controller is described by
α equations (8) and (9), which introduce a delay of L(t) and B(t)
θ= ; (3) relative to their steady-state values.
x F (α − 1) + 1

dL
i i aL + L = Ls (t − τ L ) (8)
α xD 1 − xD dt
Rmin = + −1 ; (4)
α−θ 1−θ

dB
aB + B = Bs (t − τ B ) (9)
1,7587 dt
 N − N min 
A = 1 − 1,333 ∗  ; (5)
 N +1 
C. Dynamic simulation of the control structure
The testing of the proposed control structure is done using
Unisim® Design dynamic simulator, Fig. 6.
A + Rmin
R= ; (6)
1− A

Fig. 6. Dynamic simulation diagram of feedforward control structure.

750
 The steady-state values of the controller outputs were
calculated in the simulator using Feedforward Controller
Spreadsheet module, Fig. 7. Regarding the dynamic
components, they have associated first order elements with
gain=1 and the time constants aL = 150 min. and aB = 175 min,
implemented with TRF (transfer function) modules.
Fig. 7. The Spreadsheet module that implements steady-state subsystem.
The feedforward control structure presented in Fig. 6 was
tested for a change of the feed flowrate from 50.62 m3/h to 55
m3/h. Analysis of the time evolution of concentration xD
indicates the absence of transient regimes which were present
in the case of feedback robust control system, Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Dynamic response of the propylene concentration in distillate.
V. OPTIMAL CONTROL STRUCTURE
The developed optimal control system aims to determine
steady-state optimal concentration of propylene in the bottom
product. This value represents one of the set-points for the
feedforward control system. This control strategy is imposed
by different importance of the separated products of the
column. For the propylene-propane separation process the
distillate price (with 90% propylene) is much higher than the
price of the bottom product (with 1...10% propylene). This
situation requires a control strategy which ensures a fixed
concentration of propylene in distillate (90%), and a
concentration of propylene in the bottom product that
optimizes a performance function associated to the distillation
process. The performance function has the form [11]
( )
Fob x Bi = 44 ∗ 10 −3 M b Δp B x i B + ca Qa , (10)
where Qa is the steam flowrate [t/h]; ca – steam price [lei/t];
∆p – difference between selling prices of distillate (propylene)
and bottom product (propane) [lei/t]; B – bottom product
flowrate [kmole/h]; xBi – required propylene concentration in
bottom product [mole fr.].
The first term in relation (10) is associated to the recovery
of the valuable product, and the second term defines the
operation effort. The link between the variables of the
objective function and the process control agents is given by
Qa = rD (L + F − B ) , [t/h] (11)
and also by the mathematical model defined by equations (1)–
(7).
The study of the performance function (10) emphasizes the
importance of the financial elements in relation with the
optimal control system operation. Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show the
performance function dependence of the set-point associated
with the propylene concentration in the bottom product [12].
Different ratios between price difference of the two products
and the steam price leads to various aspects of the
performance function. The case presented in Fig. 9 shows an
obvious minimum of the objective function and consequently
the optimal control system will have good performances.
Fig. 9. The objective function representation in conditions Δp = 160000 lei/t
and ca = 20 lei/t.
When one of the two financial components is modified, the
performance function will indicate the necessity of the optimal
control system. In the case presented in Fig. 10 the price of
energy (the steam from the reboiler) is twice the value from
the previous case. In these conditions, the optimum position is
751
no longer rigorously defined, and the optimum value could be
replaced by an optimum operating range.
Fig. 10. The objective function representation in conditions Δp = 160000
lei/t and ca = 40 lei/t.
The optimal controller from this level contains the
objective function, the control mathematical model from level
2 and an optimal algorithm.
To determine the optimal value there were tested
algorithms from elimination methods class such as Fibonacci,
golden section or sequential minimal optimization algorithms,
their performances being presented in [12]. For the simulation
of the optimal control system was used Spreadsheet Optimizer
module from Unisim® Design. Although this module is
usually used for the optimization of multivariable functions
with constraints and simple margins, it was also used for the
monovariable function (10). In Fig. 11 are presented the
elements of the module: distillate quality specification,
process disturbances values (imported from column simulation
module), initial value of the propylene concentration in the
bottom product, relations and results for the variables which
define model (1)-(7), the objective function and its minimum
value, and the optimum value of the propylene quality
specification in the bottom product.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The paper presented the authors’ research regarding
distillation robust control, with application to propylene-
propane separation process. Using design elements such as
relative gain array and control laws, there were developed
three control structures for the quality of the separated
products: a feedback control structure, a feedforward control
structure and an optimal control structure. Each structure was
simulated using Unisim® Design environment. The
feedforward control structure total rejects the effects of the
disturbances on the distillate quality. The implementation of
View publication stats
the optimal structure additionally ensures the reduction of the
financial loss for the distillation process.
Fig. 11. Implementation of the Spreadsheet Optimizer module used for
calculation of the optimal setpoint for the feedforward controller.
REFERENCES
[1] C. Patrascioiu, N. Paraschiv, and M. Popescu, ”The Quality Control of
the Multi-Component Fractionation Process”, Petroleum – Gas University
of Ploiesti Bulletin, Technical Series, Vol LXII, No. 4B, Ploiesti, pp. 67-
74, 2010.
[2] Băieşu A., “Controlling a Complex Propylene-Propane Distillation
Column Using a Robust Method Suitable for Simple Processes”, Revista
de Chimie, Vol. 64, Nr. 4, p. 445-450, 2013.
[3] S. Frâncu and M. Popescu, “On the Internal Model Control Applied to
Propylene Separation Process”, Petroleum – Gas University of Ploiesti
Bulletin, Technical Series, Vol. LV, No. 2/2003, pp. 109-118, 2003.
[4] M. Popescu, “Hierarchical Control of a Fractionation Column using
HC900 Controller”, Petroleum – Gas University of Ploiesti Bulletin,
Technical Series, Vol. LXI, No. 3/2009, pp. 229-234, 2009.
[5] M. Popescu M. and S.F. Mihalache, “Hierarchical control of a
depropanizer column”, Petroleum – Gas University of Ploiesti Bulletin,
Technical Series, Vol. LXVI, No. 4/2014, pp. 53-60, 2014.
[6] F.G. Shinskey, Process Control Systems: Application, Design, and
Tuning, McGraw-Hill, 1996.
[7] S.F. Mihalache, C. Patrascioiu, and N. Paraschiv, “Pilot Plant for Testing
Control Configurations of Binary Distillation Columns”, Revista de
Chimie, Vol. 59, No. 8, pp. 926-929, 2008.
[8] *** Process Modelling using UniSim Design, Student Guide 4526,
Honeywell, 2009.
[9] C. Patrascioiu, M. Popescu, and N. Paraschiv, “Specific Problems of
Using Unisim Design® in the Dynamic Simulation of the Propylene-
Propane Distillation Column”, Revista de Chimie, Vol. 65, No. 9, pp.
1086-1091, 2014.
[10] V. Marinoiu, N. Paraschiv, and C. Patrascioiu, “Conducerea cu
calculatorul a procesului de separare a propenei”, Revista de chimie, Vol
37, Nr. 11, pp. 990-994, 1986
[11] V. Marinoiu and N. Paraschiv, Automatizarea proceselor chimice,
Editura Tehnica, Bucuresti, 1992.
[12] C. Pătrăşcioiu, Tehnici numerice de optimizare, Editura MatrixRom,
Bucuresti, 2005.
752