Jump to content



Featured Articles

Check out the latest featured articles.

File Library

Check out the latest downloads available in the File Library.

New Article

Product Viscosity vs. Shear

Featured File

Vertical Tank Selection

New Blog Entry

Low Flow in Pipes- posted in Ankur's blog

3

Methanol Water Distillation Column


3 replies to this topic
Share this topic:
| More

#1 Kakashi-01

Kakashi-01

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 27 January 2025 - 09:55 PM

I understand that in practice, crude methanol is first fed to a topping column to remove compounds lighter than methanol. The bottoms stream of the topping column is then pumped into the main refining column, where the methanol is purified to the required grade. However, the process flow diagram I am designing for methanol production using the natural gas steam reforming process does not include this step, and I am required to simulate a simple distillation column.

I am simulating a distillation column for separating a methanol/water mixture, imposing a product specification of 99.9% purity and a mass flow rate of 10,500 kg/h for the methanol stream, with 1% methanol in the bottom stream. The software I am using allows the number of stages and the feed stage location to be set as parameters that the user can change. The reflux ratio, boilup ratio, and the column condenser vapor fraction can either be specified or calculated by the program.

Using initial values of 13 stages and a feed stage located at the 7th stage, and specifying the purity specifications (1% methanol in the bottom stream and 99.9% in the overhead liquid), I let the program calculate the reflux ratio, boilup ratio, and condenser vapor fraction. The results were 14.3951, 10.5097, and 0.00137, respectively.

I understand that the separation specifications must be met regardless of the reflux ratio, but increasing the reflux ratio incurs additional reboiler and condenser duties, at the expense of saving column stages. The simulation program sets the column height per stage at 0.59 m and the diameter at 1 m.

I am considering that increasing the number of stages might be a better long-term investment than the ongoing costs of operating the column with a higher reflux ratio. How can one decide the optimal trade-off between capital and operational costs in this case? Additionally, is there a practical limit to column height due to crane lifting or other considerations?

 

 

Attached Files


Edited by Dumpmeadrenaline, 30 January 2025 - 02:09 AM.


#2 Dacs

Dacs

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 457 posts

Posted 27 January 2025 - 11:41 PM

How can one decide the optimal trade-off between capital and operational costs in this case?

 

 

By performing a Life Cycle Cost analysis. At the end of the day, it's all about the moolah.

 

Additionally, is there a practical limit to column height due to crane lifting or other considerations?

 

 

While I can understand your question, we can't answer this as Process Engineers. Engage with your Mechanical/Civil counterpart for this.


Edited by Dacs, 27 January 2025 - 11:41 PM.


#3 Pilesar

Pilesar

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1,554 posts

Posted 28 January 2025 - 12:51 AM

There is a minimum number of stages required to meet the specifications even with the reflux ratio approaching the infinite. There is a minimum reflux ratio required to meet the specs even when the stages approach the infinite. Consider rules of thumb for initial sizing such as 'twice the minimum number of stages' or '1.2 times the minimum reflux ratio' to get in the general vicinity of a reasonable design. 



#4 breizh

breizh

    Gold Member

  • Admin
  • 6,715 posts

Posted 28 January 2025 - 01:41 AM

Hi,

You may want to use this Xcel sheet to simulate your process.

R= 1.2 to 1.3 Rm is a standard value.

Breizh

Attached Files






Similar Topics