Process integration 1

Muralikrishnan Research Article

Gopalakrishnan1
José María Ponce-Ortega2 A Systems Approach for Process
Mahmoud M. El-Halwagi3,4
Simplification through Process Integration
1
Houston, Texas, USA.
2
Department of Chemical A new approach for process intensification through process simplification is pro-
Engineering, Universidad posed. This approach is based on a mass-integration framework for reducing the
Michoacana de San Nicolás de number of processing steps for grassroots and retrofit designs. Two procedures
Hidalgo, Morelia, Michoacán, are presented based on graphical and mathematical programming techniques.
Mexico. The process simplification task is aimed at synthesizing process configurations
3
Chemical Engineering that involve the least number of processing steps while yielding a certain product
Department, Texas A&M from a set of raw materials. The new concepts of maximum extendible zones and
University, College Station product paths are introduced and incorporated into the design procedure. The
Texas, USA. solution identifies the simplest processes along with their configuration, stream
4 distribution, and basic performance data.
Adjunct Faculty at the
Chemical and Materials
Keywords: Pathway optimization, Process integration, Process intensification, Process
Engineering Department,
simplification
King Abdulaziz University,
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Received: November 15, 2011; revised: December 17, 2011; accepted: December 20, 2011
DOI: 10.1002/ceat.201100605

1 Introduction number of processing steps and units. Process simplification

Recently, process intensification has gained a lot of attention
in the chemical process industry because of the impact on effi-
ciency and sustainability [1, 2]. In this regard, Lutze et al. [3]
proposed a general framework for synthesizing and designing
intensified processes. Van Gerven and Stankiewikz [4] pre-
sented a fundamental vision for process intensification consid-
ering four approaches called spatial, thermodynamic, func-
tional and temporal domains. Moulijn et al. [5] described
approaches for process intensification and its relation to other
chemical engineering disciplines. Hessel [6] introduced an
approach for the use of microstructured reactors with the goal
of enhancing process intensification. Charpentier [7] pre-
sented additional classes of process intensification and showed
the importance of intensification for future chemical process-
es. Klatt and Marquardt [8] presented a process-systems engi-
neering perspective for process intensification. Additionally,
there has been an emphasis on intensifying individual units
such as heat exchangers [9–11] and reaction steps [12, 13].
Al-Otaibi and El-Halwagi [14] proposed a method for process
intensification through yield maximization.
A particularly useful approach to process intensification
during the conceptual design and process development phases
is process simplification. The objective of process simplifica-
tion is to create process flow sheets with the least or a reduced
can indirectly lead to reduced capital investments and
enhanced process intensification. Traditionally, process simpli-
fication has been carried out using engineering judgment and
experience as well as corporate preference. Basic chemistry and
kinetic data are first used to develop the reactor configuration.
Next, separation systems are added to yield the desired prod-
uct quality. Furthermore, additional units are employed to
prepare the feeds, provide heating and cooling, handle materi-
als, and meet environmental and safety requirements. The flow
sheet development activity is carried out iteratively with
equipment design, simulation, and economic calculations used
to refine the design. This conventional approach leads to pro-
cess flow sheets that meet the desired objectives [15–18] but
not necessarily simplification objectives.
Therefore, this work presents a systematic approach to pro-
cess simplification at the conceptual process design level. The
objective is to convert the raw materials to products in the
least number of processing steps. This involves choosing the
proper technologies, unit type, unit size, operating conditions,
and materials. The proposed approach utilizes graphical and
algorithmic approaches. The graphical approach provides
insights to the design engineer on the operating zones for the
available units, and the algorithmic approach optimizes the
overall costs of the process.

– 2 Problem Statement
Correspondence: Dr. M. El-Halwagi (el-halwagi@tamu.edu), Depart-
ment of Chemical Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, The problem for process simplification can be summarized as
Texas 77843, USA. follows (see Fig. 1). Given a specific product and candidate raw

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
2 M. El-Halwagi et al.
Process
Raw
Materials
Reactor 1
Reactor 2
materials, develop a cost-effective process flow sheet that has
the least number of processing steps needed to convert the feed
to the desired product and by-product(s), while meeting tech-
nical, environmental and safety requirements.
3 Design Challenges and Complexity
In synthesizing and simplifying the process flow sheet the fol-
lowing questions need to be answered:
– What are the reaction schemes and units?
– Which streams need separation?
– What species must be removed? To what extent?
– Which separation step should be utilized? Where?
– What are the characteristics of each unit?
– Which streams need to be mixed? Recycled?
– What are the operating conditions?
To answer these questions, a systematic approach must be
developed to address all of the design challenges and provide
an optimal solution.
4 Proposed Design Approach
The proposed solution approach uses mass integration funda-
mentals to tackle the problem for process simplification. Mass
integration aims at optimal allocation of species and streams
throughout the process. Mass integration addresses the genera-
tion, conversion, routing, and separation of mass. Two
approaches are proposed to solve the addressed problem:
graphical and algorithmic. The graphical approach helps to
develop insights into the problem and also provides initial
solutions for the algorithmic approach.
4.1 Graphical Approach
The graphical approach is intended to guide the process engi-
neer in generating initial configurations and in providing in-
sights into the flow sheet synthesis problem. The key idea in
the graphical approach is to use thermodynamic and practical
bounds as well as mass integration to generate flow sheets with
the smallest number of processing steps. Towards this end, the
www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Product/
By-products
Terminal gas and
liquid waste streams
Figure 1. Problem definition for
process simplification.
concept of a bounding zone called the maximum extendable
zone (MEZ) is introduced for each processing step. Once the
MEZs are developed, the process simplification task is trans-
formed into a mapping problem where the objective is to
intersect these bounding zones (see Fig. 2). This mapping
allows for the identification of the necessary conditions for the
intersection of the bounding zones. These conditions are then
transformed into unit performance and configuration infor-
mation. The mapping also provides a conceptual flow sheet
that has the least number of processing stages, and explicit cost
assessments have to be used to link process simplification with
process design. For grassroots design, the simplest process can
be identified easily once the MEZ is constructed for the pro-
cessing units. For retrofit design, path simplification rules can
be used to identify the number of processing steps. Path sim-
plification rules and MEZ are discussed in the following sec-
tions.
Raw Materials
Process
Stage I
Flowrate
Process
Stage II Process
Stage III
Product
Composition
Figure 2. MEZ for a conceptual process (flow rate vs composi-
tion).
4.1.1 Construction of Maximum Extendable Zones
The MEZ is the largest zone in the flow rate/composition space
that can be generated by a given technology. The MEZ can be
developed for both retrofit design and grassroots design. For
retrofit design (existing process), the MEZ is bounded by ther-
modynamics, certain fundamental principles (e.g., Kremser
Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12
 Process integration 3

and Fenske equations), physical limitations (e.g., Raw

shell height) and acceptable modifications within Materials
the process (e.g., replacing trays). For grassroots Rxn A
design, there are more degrees of freedom and the Raw
Materials
zone is bounded only by thermodynamics and fun-
damental principles mentioned above as well as
practical limitations imposed on design. Graphi- Sepn I Rxn
cally, the procedure can represent up to three key
components. For a higher number, the algorithmic
approach described later should be used. To tackle Sepn II
Product Sepn I

Fl
ow
all the components simultaneously, a triangular

ra
diagram is developed (see Fig. 3). In addition to

te
the zone in the flow rate/composition space, there Sepn II
also exists a corresponding zone in the composi- Product
tion domain. Starting with a certain feedstock, the B C
MEZ processing the feedstock defines the largest
attainable boundaries which are then intersected Figure 3. MEZ for a conceptual process (multicomponent process).
with the MEZs of various processing steps until
the product is reached. The development of the MEZ models Rule I: Extending the operating zones
for some of the typical processes is discussed in the Appendix
Consider the process shown in Fig. 4 and its corresponding
A of this paper. Once the MEZs are developed, the process
multicomponent path diagram. Design and operating condi-
simplification task is transforming into a mapping problem
tions of U1 and U4 can be altered until MEZs of U1 and U4
where the objective is to intersect these bounding zones. This
intersect each other eliminating U2 and U3.
mapping allows for the identification of the conditions neces-
sary for the intersection of the bounding zones. These condi-
Rule II: Eliminating/simplifying species cycling
tions are then transformed into unit performance and config-
uration information. The mapping also provides a conceptual Consider the path diagram shown in Fig. 5 where the species
flow sheet that has the least number of processing stages. form a cycle by going through the steps (a), (b), (c), and (d). If
this process can be replaced by step s, then the species cycling
is eliminated and the processing steps are minimized.
4.1.2 Path Simplification Rules The graphical approach can be used to quickly generate alter-
nate solutions and insights. For a more rigorous approach and
For retrofit design, path simplification rules can be used to for systems with more than three key components, an algorith-
identify the minimum number of processing steps. The first mic approach is presented next.
step in applying path simplification rules is to develop a multi-
component path diagram. In principle, the multicomponent
path diagram is similar to the single component path diagram 4.2 Algorithmic Approach
[19]. The multicomponent path can be constructed on a trian-
gular diagram as shown in Fig. 3. The following are the path In the algorithmic approach, a two-stage targeting approach is
simplification rules: adopted. In the first stage (Target I), the minimum number of

A U1 U2 U3 U4
S4
S0 S1 S2 S3 S0

S3 U4

S2
Fl
ow
ra S0 S1
te U1

B C

Figure 4. Rule I. Extending operating zones to intersect.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
4 M. El-Halwagi et al.

A
Sa

Sb a

S d
Sc
Fl

Sd
ow

b
ra
te

U1 c

Figure 5. Rule II. Eliminating/Simplify-

B C
ing species cycling.

processing steps required for converting the raw materials to

X
vi ˆ vij ; 8i ˆ 1; 2; :::; NV (5)
products is determined. This solution represents a lower jˆ1
bound for the second stage (Target II) and reduces its com- X
plexity. In the second stage (Target II), the problem is formu- li ˆ lij ; 8i ˆ NV ‡ 1; :::; NV ‡ NL (6)
jˆMV ‡1
lated as an optimization program and it is solved to identify
the optimum flow sheet configuration along with the opti- Energy constraints: Energy constraints allow for the heat bal-
mum operating conditions. Fig. 6 shows the process represen- ances to determine the external utilities:
tation that is used to transform the process simplification into X
a mathematical optimization problem. For each targeted spe- Vj H j ˆ vij hi ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; MV (7)
cies, there are sources (streams that carry the species) and sinks iˆ1
X
(units that accept these species). Process sinks include reactors, Lj Uj ˆ lij ui ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML (8)
heaters/coolers, compressors/decompressors, etc. Streams iˆNV ‡1
leaving sinks become in turn sources. Therefore, sinks are also
Terminal streams constraints: The following relationships are
generators of the targeted species. The sources are composed
used for product flow, product composition and environmen-
of the sets gas sources = {i: i = 1,2,...,NV} and liquid sources
tal constraints for terminal streams:
= {i: i = NV+1,NV+2,..., NV+NL}1). Any of the sources can be
sent to the sinks either directly or after mixing. Several sinks Vj ≥ Vjterminal ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; tV (9)
can accept a source. These sinks can be classified into two:
units that accept gaseous streams only gas units = {j: j = terminal
1,2,...,MV} and units that accept liquid streams only liquid yjk ≥ yjk ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; tV ; k ˆ 1; 2; :::; NS (10)
units = {j: j = MV+1,MV+2,...,MV+ML}.
The general equations for the algorithmic approach are giv-
Lj ≥ Lterminal
j ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML (11)
en by:
Mixing constraints: Mixing constraints allow for mixing of
different gaseous and liquid sources: terminal
xjk ≥ xjk ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML ; k ˆ 1; 2; :::; NS
(12)
X
Vj ˆ vij ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; MV (1)
iˆ1
X These general relationships are used to model Target I for
Vj Yjk ˆ vij yik ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; MV ; k ˆ 1; 2; :::; NS (2)
unit minimization and Target II for cost minimization.
iˆ1
X
Lj ˆ lij ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML (3)
iˆNV ‡1 4.2.1 Target I Formulation
X
Lj Xjk ˆ lij xik ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML ;
iˆNV ‡1 (4) Modeling formulation for Target I consists in previous rela-
k ˆ 1; 2; :::; NS tionships (1) to (12) in addition to the following relationships.
Objective function for Target I: The objective function for the
Splitting constraints: Splitting constraints allow for splitting Target I formulation consists in minimizing the total number
of gaseous and liquid sources: of processing units.
X
– min Ej (13)
1) List of symbols at the end of the paper. jˆ1

www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12
 Process integration 5

ESA/MSA IN

Gas Processes
Vj Y jk
Products/
yik Byproducts
Gas Sources vij
'
i=1 vi' yik
Rxn
''
. li'' xi
.
.
H/C

i=NV
Back to
C/D process

Sepn

Liquid Processes
Lj X jk
Products/
xik Byproducts
Liquid Sources lij

i=NV+1
Rxn
.
.
.
H/C

i=NV+NL Back to
C/D process

Sepn

H/C= Heating/Cooling
C/D= Compression/Decompression
SPIN
Figure 6. Process representation.

To represent the MEZs, the following relationship is applied Similarly, the following equation applies to units that pro-
for units that process gas streams: cess liquid streams:


vi ; yik ; li ; xik † ˆ fj Lj ; Xjk ; Uj ; j ˆ MV ‡ 1; :::; MV ‡ ML


vi ; yik ; li ; xik † ˆ fj Vj ; Yjk ; Hj ; j ˆ 1; 2; :::; MV (14) (15)

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
6 M. El-Halwagi et al.
Unit matching constraints for Target I: The
unit matching constraints are needed to identi-
fy which units will be part of the final solution.
TAC=$64,400,000/year
Vj ≤ Vjmax Ej ; 8j ˆ 1; 2; :::; MV (16)
Lj ≤ Ljmax Ej ; 8j ˆ MV ‡ 1; MV
(17)
‡ 2; :::; MV ‡ ML Butyl Alcohol
The rest of the model is based on the con-
straints given by relationships (1) to (12).
Target I formulation is a mixed integer non-
linear program (MINLP). If the MEZs are line-
arized, the resulting model is a mixed integer
linear program (MILP). Target I formulation
can produce a list of flow sheets ranked accord-
ing to the number of processing stages. Once a
solution is generated, an “integer cut” is added
to generate the next solution, and so on. The
flow sheets obtained from Target I formulation
are optimized for cost in Target II. In Target II,
additional and more comprehensive con-
straints on the physical, chemical and perfor-
mance of the involved units and species are
included. (MEK) Product
Figure 7. Existing flow sheet for MEK process.
4.2.2 Target II Formulation
In addition to minimizing the number of processing units, the
developed formulation can also be used to minimize cost. Tar-
get II formulation includes the same set of constraints as Tar-
get I formulation but involves a different objective function
which is aimed at minimizing the total annualized cost (TAC):
Min TAC (18)
Process constraints for Target II: More comprehensive con-
straints on the physical, chemical and performance of the in-
volved units and species are included in this formulation.
5 Case Study
The aforementioned techniques are generally applicable to a
wide variety of process technologies and plant capacities.
Here, a methylethylketone (MEK) process is used as a case
study to demonstrate the benefits of applying the process
simplification approach proposed in this paper. The existing
flow sheet is shown in Fig. 7. The reaction involves catalytic
vapor phase dehydrogenation of butyl alcohol (A) to produce
MEK (M) and hydrogen (H). The reaction products are
cooled with chilled water when partial condensation of MEK
and butyl alcohol occurs. The uncondensed vapor is scrubbed
with water to remove all the organics present in the vapor.
The hydrogen effluent from the scrubber is sent for flaring or
used in boilers. The bottoms from the scrubber are extracted
with a solvent (1,1,2 trichloroethane). The extract phase is
www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
RXN: Sec − Butyl Alcohol → MEK + H 2
H2
Water
Reactor U=2
Absorption
U=1 Column
U=3
Product Solvent Extraction
Distillation Column
Column
U=5 U=4
U=6
Solvent
then distilled to recover the solvent. The top product from
solvent distillation is again distilled to separate alcohol and
MEK. The separated alcohol is recycled to the reactor. The
current process has six units and the TAC for this option is
$64.4 MM/year. The objective of this case study is to identify
a cost-effective flow sheet with the minimum number of pro-
cessing steps.
5.1 Solution Procedure
The solution procedure involves using the graphical technique
to identify the initial solution and then to solve the optimiza-
tion problem (Targets I and II). The steps involved in the gra-
phical technique are discussed below:
– Identify basic species: MEK, H2 and alcohol.
– MEZ is developed for each processing technology: reactor,
condenser, absorption, extraction and distillation.
– Develop a path diagram for each species based on the least
number of jumps among MEZ using path simplification
rules.
– Identify the least number of processing steps.
Applying rule I for the current path, one can clearly see that
the operating zone of the condenser can be extended to inter-
sect with the boiler (see Fig. 8). Based on Fig. 9, it is shown that
the current process has species cycling (loop 2). If this species
cycling can be eliminated, then the number of processing steps
can be reduced. Both rules I and II indicate that the absorber,
solvent extraction and solvent distillation can be eliminated.
Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12
 Process integration 7

A A

ln

Rxn
Rxn
t C
Pd
tln
is
D
d
Con d
Co Con Co
nd nd

Abs. Extrc. Distln

ln Abs tln
tC is
Pd D

K H2 K Extending Condensing Zone H2

Actual Path Diagram

Figure 8. Rule I: Extending operating zones.

A A

Rxn
ln

Rxn
tC

ln
Pd

st
Di
d
Con
d Con
Co
Co

nd
nd

Loop 2
Abs. Extrc. Distln
ln

Abs
ln
tC

st
Di
Pd

K H2 K Eliminating Loop 2 H2
Actual Path Diagram

Figure 9. Rule II: Eliminating/Simplifying species cycling.

TAC=52,100,000/year
The new flow sheet is shown in Fig. 10. Applying rule I again
Condenser
to extend the operating zone of the absorber, the condenser
Reactor U=2 Ammonia
can be eliminated (see Fig. 11). This process alternative is
Butyl Alcohol U=1 H2
shown in Fig. 12.
Targets I and II formulations are solved using the initial so-
lution generated from the graphical technique. The simplest
process has three units and the TAC is $52.1 MM/year (see
Fig. 10). In this option, the coolant in the condenser is changed
to ammonia and three process units (i.e., absorber, extraction
and solvent distillation) are eliminated from the current pro-
cess. The next alternative process has five units and the asso-
ciated TAC is $83.7 MM/year (see Fig. 12). In this option, one
unit is eliminated from the current process. The current pro-
cess has six units and the TAC is $64.4 MM/year. It is interest- Product
ing to note that although process alternative 2 (see Fig. 12) has Column
U=3
fewer units than the current process (see Fig. 7), the TAC is
higher for process alternative 2.

(MEK) Product

Figure 10. Process alternative I.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
8 M. El-Halwagi et al.

A A

Rxn
n

Rxn
Cl
t
Pd

n
Cl
t
Pd
d
Con
istln

Co
rc, D Ab
Ext s
Abs,
nd
Abs. Extrc. Distln
n

Abs

ln
Cl

st
Di
t
Pd

K H2 K Extended Absorber Zone H2

Actual Path Diagram

Figure 11. Rule I: Extending operating zones (absorber).

H2 odology allows the identification of a set of alter-

TAC=$83,700,000/year native solutions from which the designer can
choose.
Water

Reactor The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

Absorption
Butyl Alcohol U=1 Column
U=2

Appendix A: Maximum Extendable

Zones
This appendix presents the development of maxi-
mum extendable zone (MEZ) models for some of
the typical units that can be encountered in the
chemical processes.
Solvent Extraction
Product
Distillation Column Separation
Column
U=4 U=3
U=5
Typical separation processes like distillation, gas
absorption/regeneration, extraction/solvent regen-
eration, condensation and reverse osmosis can be
represented by an inlet stream and two outlet
Solvent
(MEK) Product streams (see Fig. A1). The component and overall
material balance around the separation unit can be
Figure 12. Process alternative 2. represented by the following equations:

6 Conclusions D+B=F (A1)

Developing conceptual flow sheet alternatives with the least DxD + BxB = FxF (A2)
number of processing steps is an important objective during
research and development and can be used for process intensi- Eq. (A2) can be rewritten as follows:
fication and cost reduction. In this paper, a systematic method
has been developed to address the problem process simplifica- FxF BxB
Dˆ (A3)
tion. A shortcut graphical approach is proposed to identify ini- xD xD
tial solutions. Then, the problem is formulated as an optimiza-
tion problem to identify cost-effective flow sheets with the For a given F and xF, maximum distillated flow D occurs
least number of processing units. Cost can also be added as an when BxB = 0. Therefore, Eq. (A3) becomes:
alternate target. Results from the case study show that the
minimum number of processing steps may not correspond to FxF
Dˆ (A4)
the solution with the minimum cost; and the proposed meth- xD

www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12
 Process integration 9

Distillate

D xD

Feed Distillation
Column
F xF
D xD

Bottom
B xB
F xF
Separation

D Product Product B
xD xB

B xB

Regeneration
Primary

Feed F
xF

Figure A1. Schemes for a separation process.

Eq. (A3) provides the MEZ for a separation process and it is Distillation
shown in Fig. A2.
Eq. (A3) provides the MEZ for one component. However, any
The possible range for distillate composition xD is between
typical process has multiple components. To develop the MEZ
xF and 1. When xD = 1, then Eq. (A4) becomes:
in the composition space, the Fenske equation can be used for
D = FxF (A5) distillation:
When xD = xF, Eq. (A4) becomes: aN min

1 FR1 †dist

1i
FRi †bot ˆ   ; i ˆ 2; 3; :::; NS
D=F (A6) FR1 †dist ‡ a1i 1 FR1 †dist
(A8)
Heat Induced Separations
Typical heat induced separations are condensation and crystal- Fxiin 1

FRi †bot

lization. Eq. (A3) provides the MEZ for one component. How- xit ˆ ; i ˆ 2; 3; :::; NS (A9)
D
ever, any typical process has multiple components. To develop
the MEZ in the composition space, the following relationships
Fxiin 1
 
can be used for heat induced separation processes: FRi †dist
xib ˆ ; i ˆ 2; 3; :::; NS (A10)
p T † B
yit ˆ i (A7)
P
NS
X
where, p6 i T † is the partial pressure of component i as a func- B ˆ Fx1in 1 xiin FR1 †bot
 
FR1 †dist ‡ F (A11)
tion of temperature, and P is the total pressure of the system. iˆ2
For a given refrigerant, the lowest temperature that can be
attained is known. Then, the lowest attainable composition NS
X
(yit ) can be calculated, which gives the MEZ for heat induced D ˆ Fx1in FR1 †dist ‡ F xiin 1
 
FR1 †bot (A12)
separations. iˆ2

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
10 M. El-Halwagi et al.

Flowrate
D
F Maximum
Recovery
FxF Line
D=
xD

FxF

Maximum
Extendible
Zone

xF 1 Composition of Product
Figure A2. MEZ for a separation pro-
xD cess.

where, FR1 †dist is the relative volatility of component i with Nmin [–] minimum number of theoretical
respect to component 1, FRi †bot is the fractional recovery of plates
component i in the bottoms, FR1 †dist is the fractional recovery NS [–] number of species
of component i in distillation, Nmin is the minimum number NV [–] number of vapor sources
of theoretical plates, F is the feed flow rate, D is the distillated pi T) [N m–2] partial pressure of component i as a
flow rate, B is the bottoms flow rate, xiin is the inlet composi- function of temperature T
tion of component i, NS is the total number of components. P [N m–2] total pressure of the system
FR1 †dist tends to 1 for the most volatile species, whereas Nmin tV [–] number of terminal streams
can be fixed to a very large number. Then, the outlet composi- T [K] temperature
tion xit and xib can be calculated to provide the MEZ for distil- ui [J] enthalpy for liquid stream i
lation. Uj [J] enthalpy for liquid stream to sink j
vi [kg s–1] gaseous flow for source i
vij [kg s–1] gaseous flow from source i to sink j
Symbols used vi′ [kg s–1] outlet gaseous flow from sink
Vj [kg s–1] total gaseous flow to sink j
a1i [–] relative volatility of component i Vjterminal [kg s–1] flow of terminal liquid stream j
with respect to component 1 xB [–] composition in bottoms stream
B [kg s–1] bottoms flow rate xD [–] composition in distillate stream
D [kg s–1] distillate flow rate xik [–] composition of species k in liquid
Ej [–] binary integer variable indicating the stream i
presence of the unit in final solution xik′ [–] composition of species k in outlet
–1
F
[kg s ] feed flow rate liquid flow from sink
FRi bot [–] fractional recovery of component i xF [–] composition in stream inlet to

in bottoms separator
FRi dist
[–] fractional recovery of component i xiin [–] inlet composition of component i
in distillate terminal
xjk [–] composition of species k in terminal
hi [J] enthalpy for gaseous stream i liquid stream j
Hj [J] enthalpy for gaseous stream to sink j Xjk [–] composition of species k in total
li [kg s–1] liquid flow for source i liquid flow to sink j
li
2
[kg s–1] outlet liquid flow from sink yik [–] composition of species k in gaseous
lij [kg s–1] liquid flow from source i to sink j stream i
Lj [kg s–1] total liquid flow to sink j yik′ [–] composition of species k in outlet
Ljterminal [kg s–1] flow of terminal liquid stream j gaseous flow from sink
ML [–] number of units accepting liquids yit [–] lowest attainable composition
only terminal
yjk [–] composition of species k in terminal
MV [–] number of units accepting vapors gaseous stream j
only Yjk [–] composition of species k in total
NL [–] number of liquid sources gaseous flow to sink j

www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12
 Process integration 11

Subscripts [10] J. M. Ponce-Ortega, M. Serna-Gonzalez, A. Jimenez-Gutier-

rez, Comput. Chem. Eng. 2008, 32 (10), 2320.
i source
[11] J. Jezowski, R. Bochenek, A. Jezowska, Appl. Therm. Eng.
j sink
2000, 21 (13–14), 1429.
k species
[12] T. Fornari, E. Rotstein, G. Stephanopoulos, Chem. Eng. Sci.
1989, 44 (7), 1569.
[13] V. Pham, M. M. El-Halwagi, AIChE J. 2011, in press.
References
DOI: 10.1002/aic.12640
[14] M. Al-Otaibi, M. El-Halwagi, Trans. IChemE, Part A: Chem.
[1] Process Intensification: History, Philosophy, Principles (Eds:
Eng. Res. Des. 2006, 84 (A10), 943.
A. Stankiewicz, J. Moulijn), Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York
[15] J. Douglas, Conceptual Design of Chemical Process, McGraw-
2004.
Hill Publishing Co., New York 1988.
[2] A. Stankiewicz, J. A. Moulijn, Chem. Eng. Prog. 2000, 96 (1),
[16] R. M. Smith, Chemical Process: Design and Integration, John
22.
Wiley & Sons, Hoboken 2005.
[3] P. Lutze, R. Gani, J. M. Woodley, Chem. Eng. Process. 2010,
[17] M. M. El-Halwagi, Sustainable Design through Process Inte-
49 (6), 57.
gration: Fundamentals and Applications to Industrial Pollution
[4] T. van Gerven, A. Stankiewicz, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2009, 48
Prevention, Resource Conservation, and Profitability Enhance-
(5), 2465.
ment, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford 2011.
[5] J. A. Moulijn, A. Stankiewicz, J. Grievink, A. Gorak, Compu.
[18] L. T. Biegler, I. E. Grossmann, A. W. Westerberg, Systematic
Chem. Eng. 2008, 32 (1–2), 3.
Methods of Chemical Process Design, Prentice Hall, Engle-
[6] V. Hessel, Chem. Eng. Technol. 2009, 32 (11), 1655.
wood Cliffs, NJ 1997.
[7] J. C. Charpentier, Chem. Eng. J. 2007, 134 (1–3), 84.
[19] M. M. El-Halwagi, A. A. Hamad, G. W. Garrison, AIChE J.
[8] K. U Klatt, W. Marquardt, Comput. Chem. Eng. 2009, 33 (3),
1996, 42 (11), 3087.
536.
[9] R. Anantharaman, I. Nastad, B. Nygreen, T. Gundersen,
Compu. Chem. Eng. 2010, 34 (11), 1822.

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12 © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
12 M. El-Halwagi et al.

Research Article: A new systematic A Systems Approach for Process Process

Product/
By-products
Raw
approach to process simplification is Simplification through Process Materials

presented. The objective is to convert Integration Reactor 1

the raw materials to products in the Terminal gas and

liquid waste streams

least number of processing steps. This M. Gopalakrishnan, J. M. Ponce-Ortega, Reactor 2

involves choosing the proper M. M. El-Halwagi*

technologies, unit type, unit size,
operating conditions, and materials. A Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35 (䊏),
methylethylketone process is used as a XXX … XXX
case study to demonstrate the benefits
of applying the proposed process DOI: 10.1002/ceat.201100605
simplification approach.

www.cet-journal.com © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2012, 35, No. 00, 1–12