Optimization of Methanol Process by Flowsheet Simulation

S. H. Ballman and J. L. Gaddy'

Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Missouri-Rolla,

Rolla, Missouri 6540 1

Optimization of large complex chemical processes is a necessary step in economic design of these systems.
Flowsheet simulation models afford an ideal mechanism for detailed optimization of these processes. The methanol process offers several interesting optimization variables (reformer temperature, pressure, and steam and
carbon dioxide to hydrocarbon ratios; synthesis loop pressure, temperature, purge rate, and conversion) which
require detailed models of the reaction kinetics. This paper presents the results of optimization of the intermediate pressure process using the PROPS model and the adaptive random search routine. The costs associated with
performing such a detailed process optimization study are easily justified by even nominal improvements in the
process economics.

Modular computer simulation programs are used extensively today for designing and studying chemical processes,
and development of such programs is continuing (Motard et
al., 1975). Sophisticated optimization algorithms have been
developed and applied to unit processes, such as reactors
(Barneson et al., 1970) and separators (Umeda and Ichikawa,
19711, or to simplified models of complex processes (Bracken
and McCormick, 1968; Komatsu, 1968).
Yet, few studies have been reported of the optimization of
large complex processes, modeled with flowsheet simulators.
Shannon et al. (1966) optimized a single variable of the sulfuric
acid process with PACER. Seader and Dallin (1972) also used
PACER to study the toluene dealkalation process, with a case
study search procedure. Friedman and Pinder (1972) optimized the production rate of a gasoline polymerization unit,
modeled with CHESS. This same process was studied with
PROPS by Gaines and Gaddy (1976), with the objective of
maximizing the profitability of the process. Each of the above
studies was conducted a t a university, and process optimization studies, using flowsheet simulators, if conducted in industry, have gone unreported.
The reluctance by industry to utilize simulators for detailed
optimization can probably be explained by a combination of
factors. There is considerable uncertainty over the amount
of real time and computing time required to perform a detailed
process optimization study. Industry may lack the experienced
personnel to work in this area. Bounded by tight time constraints during design and construction. the necessary approach may be to come as close to optimal conditions as possible using experienced engineers. and optimize the operation
of the facility after it is operating. Little information IS
available on the design improvements available with optimization that might justify such studies.
Most companies now use simulators during some phase of
the design, perhaps for material and energy balance data.
Therefore, it seems reasonable that additional simulation runs
could be justified for optimization to improve the design. Such
reasoning must be based upon the availability of a dependable
process model, probabiy with economics, and a suitable optimization algorithm.
The purpose of this study is to develop a detailed simuiation
model of a complex chemical process and to measure the investment in real time and computer time for optimization of
this process. The progress of the optimization is monitored
so that the improvements obtained through optimization.
even perhaps when starting very close to the optimum, can be
determined. The process chosen for study is the intermediate
pressure methanol process. This process is simulated with
PROPS and optimized using the adaptive random search
technique (Heuckroth and Gaddy, 1976).

T h e Methanol Process
Figure 1 is a typical MeOH flow diagram, showing the
equipment used for producing methanol from natural gas.
Natural gas is reacted with steam over a nickel based catalyst
in a steam-methane reformer to produce a gas mixture containing hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide. Since
excess hydrogen is available from the reforming, carbon
dioxide is added to the reformer feed to lower the ratio of
hydrogen to carbon in the reformed gas. Reforming is carried
out at temperatures between 1400 and 1700 OF. The steam
methane reaction is endothermic, and the reactor is heated
by burning a mixture of natural gas and process off gases.
Energy is recovered from the reformed gas and the combustion gases as 900 psia steam (500 O F superheat) in a waste
heat boiler. This steam is used to drive the synthesis and
recycle gas compressors. Exhaust steam from the compressor
turbines is used both as process steam for the reformer and
as a source of heat in the purification section of the process.
Centrifugal compressors are used to raise the pressure of
the makeup and recycle gases to 200 atm. The synthesis gas
(recycle plus makeup gas) is heated to 570 O F by the effluent
gas from the methanol converter. Methanol is synthesized in
the converter using a zinc oxide-chromium oxide catalyst with
a copper promoter. The methanol synthesis reaction is highly
exothermic. T o control the temperature of the reaction, cool
synthesis gas is injected between the catalyst beds. The gases
from the converter exchange heat with the converter feed and
are then cooled to atmospheric temperature to condense
methanol.
The pressure of the condensed liquid is reduced to 50 psia
and dissolved gases are removed. A significant amount of the
methanol is vaporized with the dissolved gases, and the MeOH
is recovered by scrubbing with water. The crude methanol is
then purified by distillation.
Mehta and Ross (1970) and Shah and Stillman (1970) have
reported optimization studies of the methanol process. Mehta
and Ross studied only the effect of Cor,addition to the process. Shah and Stillman developed a FORTRAN modei of the
major equipment items in the methanol process. They studied
thp effect of several variables on the control of the process;
however. only six iterations were used in the optimization
procedure.
Methanol Process Simulation
The methanol process, shown in Figure 1, was modeled
using PROPS (Process Optimization System), a modified
version of CHESS. PROPS has the capability of computing
the investment, operating cost, revenue, and profitability of
the simulated process. A description of PROPS has been
Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., Vol. 16, No. 3, 1977

337

Table I. Results of Base Case Study

Independent Variables
O F (Vl)
Reformer operating pressure, psia (V2)
H20/CH4 ratio reformer feed (V3)
CO*/CHd ratio reformer feed (V4)
Synthesis loop pressure, psia (V5)
Synthesis loop purge (V6)
Methanol converter feed temperature, OR (V7)
CO conversion methanol converter (V8)
Dependent Variables
Investment, MM$
Working capital, MM$
Earnings after taxes, MM$
Payout period, years
Return on investment, %
Methanol production, tons/day
Natural gas reformer feed, mol/h

1. Reformer operating temperature,

2.
3.
4.

5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
MET HA NOL
PRODUCT

FRACTIONATOR

L E T DOWN T A N K

Figure 1. Flow diagram of the 200 atm methanol process.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

presented earlier (Gaines and Gaddy, 1974) and will not be

reviewed here.
Standard equipment modules in PROPS were used for
modeling exchangers, separators, compressors, etc. in the
MeOH process. In addition, modules were developed for:
steam-methane reformer, waste heat boiler, boiler feed-water
heater, methanol converter, partial condenser, optimization
procedure, and production rate control. T h e details of the
simulation model are given by Ballman (1976) and are summarized in the supplementary material. (See the paragraph
a t the end of the paper regarding supplementary material.)
As usual, modeling of the reactors required the greatest
effort. The reformer model uses a modified Newton relaxation
method to solve the algebraic material and energy balance
equations to obtain the exit compositions and enthalpy. Reactor conditions are also checked to avoid carbon deposition.
The methanol converter consists of four catalyst beds with
interstage injection of cool synthesis gas to control bed temperatures. The differential equations resulting from the material and energy balance are solved simultaneously using a
fourth-order Runge-Kutta method.
As noted in Figure 1, the process has a recycle loop that
must be converged. Other iterative loops within the process
include selection of the proper synthesis gas splits between
catalyst beds, selection of reformer conditions to avoid carbonization, as well as numerous dew point, bubble point, and
temperature from enthalpy determinations. Convergence
acceleration using the secant method is used in each case.
In addition to the above iterative calculations, further
computations were required to ensure a fixed production rate.
A simulation study normally begins calculating in the first
equipment item with a given input of raw materials. In optimization, where certain variables are being manipulated, the
quantity of product varies for a specified feed rate. Therefore,
optimization of a particular MeOH plant size imposes further
iterative computations to determine the proper quantity of
natural gas feed. These computations were guided by a production rate control module, which uses either a direct ratio
for linear systems or a secant convergence acceleration for
nonlinear systems.
Once all recycle calculations are converged, the economic
calculations are made to determine equipment and operating
cost and profitability. A complete simulation of this model for
a fixed production rate requires about 40 s of CPU time (IBM
370/168). Development of the model required about six
man-months of a semi-experienced engineers time.
Verification of the Process Model
A study of this type, conducted in academia, is not privy to
the best industrial data, and must depend upon published
338

Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., Vol. 16, No. 3, 1977

1540.0
350.0
3.2
1.00
3000.0
0.01
1030.0
0.29
28.8

3.9
3.4
4.93
12.1
800.0

2600.0

sources. The methanol process is reasonably well documented,

and no amount of detail was spared in using the available data
to create a representative model. T o establish that a realistic
simulation model had been created, data obtained from the
simulation were compared with data published in the literature. T h e steam-methane reformer model was found t o give
equilibrium computations in agreement with those given by
Hougen et al. (1966b),Morse, (19731, and Wellman and Kate11
(1963). The methanol converter model produced reactor
temperatures and material flow rates which agree with those
given by Natta (1955), Strelzoff (19701, and Shah and Stillman
(1970).
Design conditions given by Shah and Stillman (1970) and
Strelzoff (1970) were used to establish a base case design. The
results of this run for a plant to produce 800 tons/day (TPD)
are given in Table I. For the design conditions shown, a plant
investment of $28.8 M M was computed and the return on
investment was found to be 12.1%. Hedley (1970) gives a
capital cost of an 800 T P D plant of $26.4 M M (corrected to
1976). T h e economic evaluation given by Hedley shows a
10.0%return on investment. Comparison of these data confirm
the ability of the model to predict realistic values of the process economics.
Optimization P r o c e d u r e
Other studies of the methanol process reactions have used
the following independent variables: reformer operating
temperature and pressure, the ratios of steam to methane and
carbon dioxide to methane in the reformer feed, and methanol
converter feed temperature (Shah and Stillman, 1970; Mehta
and Ross, 1970). In addition, the following variables have been
identified in this study: synthesis loop pressure, synthesis loop
purge, and conversion of carbon monoxide in the methanol
converter. These eight independent variables are labeled as
V1 through V8 in Table I.
The return on investment, ROI, was used as the objective
function in optimizing the methanol process. The optimization
can be stated as:
Max ROI = f ( V1, V2, . . . , V8)

(1)

subject to the constraints: 1600 I

V1 I
2200; 100 I
V2 I 500;
1I
V3 I
6; 0 I
V4 I
1;2500 I
V5 I
3500; 0.01 I
V6 I
0.15;
1000 5 V7 I
1030; 0.15 I V8 50.35; D 1 , 0 3 , D 5 , 0 7 I
1100;
1000 I
D2,D4,D6 I
1030; 0 8 , D9, D10 < 1.
T h e function, f, in eq 1 represents all the computations
performed by the equipment modules, the equipment design
module, and the economic evaluation module in the PROPS
simulation. Constraints on the independent variables are
given in eq 1. Implicit constraints involving dependent vari-

Table 11. History of Optimization of 800 Ton/Day

Methanol Process

CPU time,
min

Step
1
2

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Function
evaluations

24
15
10
10
15
20

Objective function
improvements

9
9

3
2
4

12

11

are encountered in the search region. Also, this procedure,

although random, has been found to have equal or better efficiency when compared with other methods, and demonstrates good reliability in locating the optimum (Heuckroth
et al., 1976; Kelahan and Gaddy, 1977).

13
5
14
2
8
5
1
15
8
1
10
5
2
10
6
1
20
13
1
12
20
8
3
13
8
4
1
14
15
8
3
Total
200
125
29
Total"
158
97
19
Results of search using a different starting point.
ables, D ,in eq 24 represent temperatures in the methanol
converter and carbon deposition ratios in the reformer. Constraint boundaries were set from the usual values found in the
literature.
The Adaptive Random Search procedure (Gaines and
Gaddy, 1976; Heuckroth et al., 1976) was used to guide the
selection of new values of the independent variables in the
search for the optimal value of ROI. This procedure searches
randomly in a restricted region about the best known objective
function. The Adaptive Random Search was selected because
of its ability to function effectively when implicit constraints

Results and Discussion

Four optimization searches were performed in this study.
Plant sizes of 800 T P D (two searches from different starting
points) and 1000 T P D were studied. In addition, a run was
made with fixed feed rate to determine the variations in production rate that could be expected and the savings in computer time that might be possible if the feed rate were known,
or could be estimated. Sensitivity runs were made about the
optimum in each case.
Since a large amount of computer time was expected to be
required for each study, the search procedure was halted periodically to review the progress of the search. This procedure
allows adjustment in the parameters of the search algorithm
and allows a periodic judgement on the convergence of the
search.
1. Optimization of 800 TPD MeOH Plant. Table I1 shows
the history of the search for the optimum design conditions
for an 800 T P D plant. The search was conducted in 14 steps
requiring from 8 to 24 min per step and a total of 200 min to
locate the optimum. A total of 125 evaluations of the ROI
function (eq 1) were made, for an average of 1.6 min per
evaluation. Twenty-nine improvements in ROI were found.
Similar results are noted for the search from a different
starting point.
T h e optimal results are given in Table I11 (last two rows).
A t the optimum, several of the variables lie on or near their
boundaries. Reformer temperature and pressure and meth-

Table 111. Results of Optimization of 800 Ton/Day Methanol Process

v1

v2

x lo-,'
"R

x 10-2
psia

v5
V3

V4
x 10'

x 10-3
psia

V7
V6
x 102

x 10-3

V8
10'

"R

X
~~~~

2.0000
3.5000
3.5000
5.0000
1.9997
3.5107
3.4998
5.5233
2.0830
4.7279
3.4345
5.1401
2.2000
5.0000
2.7837
3.4295
2.2000
5.0000
2.8909
3.4295
2.2000
5.0000
2.8906
4.4308
2.1941
3.8393
2.7739
8.2982
2.1941
5.0000
2.3804
8.3951
2.1938
5.0000
2.3674
8.3356
2.1266
5.0000
2.3259
7.8053
2.1266
4.9988
2.3751
5.1592
2.1265
4.9461
2.3751
5.1592
2.1266
4.9575
2.3751
5.1564
2.1266
4.9575
2.3817
5/73
2.1267
4.9570
2.5244
4.8012
2.1266
4.9570
2.7056
4.6308
2.1266
4.9570
2.7448
6.9891
2.1484
5.0000
2.7144
4.5092
2.1915
5.0000
2.7144
10.0000
2.2000
5.0000
2.5618
10.0000
2.2000
5.0000
2.3957
10.0000
2.2000
5.0000
2.5618
9.9699
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
9.9700
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
9.9700
2.2000
5,0000
2.5620
9.9700
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
9.9700
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
7.4700
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
6.9700
2.2000
5.0000
2.5620
6.1700
2.2000"
4.9500"
2.2677"
6.2594"
" Results of search using a different starting point.

3.0000
3.1204
3.1787
3.4947
3.4947
3.4979
3.3500
3.3497
3.1145
3.1371
3.1354
3.1354
3.1255
3.1255
3.0413
3.0128
2.8411
2.8204
2.8451
2.8447
2.7496
2.8456
2.5009
2.6546
2.6555
2.5000
2.5000
2.5000
2.5000
2.5000"

4.0000
4.1968
4.1966
3.9441
3.6139
4.5111
4.5110
4.4878
4.4870
2.7331
3.0588
3.0591
3.0592
3.0582
3.3124
2.2251
1.9637
2.2232
2.2232
2.2201
2.7565
2.4591
1.2391
1.2391
1.4565
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000

1.0000"

1.0150
1.0214
1.0149
1.0290
1.0300
1.0300
1.0300
1.0164
1.0163
1.0143
1.0147
1.0101
1.0164
1.0146
1.0146
1.0146
1.0146
1.0141
1.0279
1.0139
1.0139
1.0139
1.0130
1.0130
1.0130
1.0130
1.0130
1.0130
1.0130

1.oooo "

Tons/day

ROI

806
807
802
788
796
807
804
804
796
812
804
803
798
810
810
798
805
797
809
791
791
807
798
796
801
811
811
803
806
807"

6.827
7.349
10.221
10.497
10.838
10.866
11.351
12.351
12.994
13.165
13.242
13.258
13.696
13.923
13.929
14.626
15.017
15.449
15.534
15.609
15.636
15.885
16.509
16.542
17.289
18.431
19.22
20.00
20.03
19.94"

2.5000
2.5132
2.6789
3.1173
3.1618
3.1766
3.1766
3.1765
3.1745
3.4603
3.4654
3.4654
3.4649
3.4652
3.4652
3.4652
3.4652
3.4420
3.4459
3.4459
3.4547
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.4459
3.2640"

Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., Vol. 16,No. 3, 1977

339

Table IV. Sensitivity Study for 800 Ton/Day Methanol Process. Variable and ROI Values
v1
ROI
V2
ROI
v3
ROI
v4
ROI
v5
ROI
V6
ROI
V7
ROI
V8
ROI

2200.0
20.03
500.0
20.03
2.66
19.15
0.717
19.90
2900.0
18.17
0.040
17.60
1019.0
19.50
0.344
20.03

2160.0
19.35
480.0
19.63
2.56
20.03
0.667
19.92
2800.0
18.06
0.030
18.25
1016.0
19.28
0.334
20.03

anol conversion are a t their upper limit, while synthesis loop

pressure and recycle purge are a t their lower limit. Converter
temperature and steam and carbon dioxide to methane ratios
are intermediate. No attempt was made to adjust the
boundaries of these variables during this study, although this
step would certainly be indicated for an industrial study.
The most significant cost items are raw materials and
compression; therefore, it is expected that the combination
of variables would tend to minimize these costs. High temperatures and low pressures favor conversion in the reformer.
However, low reformer pressure increases compression costs.
Therefore, the combination of maximum temperature and
pressure is not unexpected and in accordance with current
design practice for reforming in ammonia synthesis, although
somewhat different from other MeOH studies (Shah and
Stillman, 1970). Case studies about the optimum, listed in
Table IV, show the ROI to be particularly sensitive to a reduction in temperature. Lower pressures reduce ROI, but less
significantly, as expected.
Low synthesis pressure and high conversion per pass lower
compression costs but increase the size of the converter. Low
purge rates conserve raw materials, but slightly increase
compressor cost. Therefore, optimal selection of the minimum
pressure and purge rate and the maximum conversion are
reasonable for the synthesis loop. Table IV shows the ROI to
be particularly sensitive to changes in pressure and purge rate.
The optimal result of intermediate values of steam and carbon
dioxide to methane ratios and near minimal converter inlet
temperature are in accord with the findings of Shah and
Stillman (1970).
The values of the variables for the 29 improved search
points are also given in Table 111. The ROI was improved from
an initial value of 6.8 to an optimal value of 20.3. In this case,
optimization resulted in additional net earnings of about $4.5
MM per year, for an investment in computer time of about
$2500. As expected, the fastest improvement is obtained early
in the search, the first half of the search reaching an ROI of
15 percent. The last hour and a half of the search resulted in
improving the ROI about 4 percentage points. This improvement represents a saving of about $1 MM per year for
a minimal investment in computer time. For this plant, am
improvement of 1% in ROI represents about $250 000 per year
in net earnings. The engineering time (6 man-months) to
create the model might cost as much as $20 000. Therefore,
the engineering time and computing time can easily be justified by even a slight improvement in ROI. Clearly, optimization with a detailed simulation model is one of the best investment opportunities available to the chemical company.
340

Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., Vol. 16, No. 3, 1977

2120.0
18.40
460.0
19.25
2.46
19.96
0.617
20.03
2700.0
18.98
0.020
18.64
1013.0
20.03
0.324
18.92

440.0
19.50
2.36
20.29
0.567
18.94
2600.0
19.15

2.26
20.62
0.517
18.86
2500.0
20.03

0.010

20.03
1010.0
19.28
0.314
19.20

1007.0
19.50
0.304
18.33

The experienced engineer may be able to design much closer

to the optimum than the starting points in this study, possibly
selecting the proper boundary for those variables which were
optimal a t a boundary. Such a selection for all five bounded
variables is somewhat questionable, however, in view of the
findings of other studies and the usual design conditions listed
in Table I. Observation of the progress of the search in Table
I11 shows that even after all variables reached a bounded
condition, the ROI was still improved about 2%. Table IV
shows that very small changes in some variables have a pronounced effect on the ROI. Therefore, considerable process
improvement may be possible, even when starting much closer
to the optimum.
Optimization of a process after it is operating is certainly
important. However, unless the initial design is first optimized, many opportunities may be lost. For example, once the
compressors are ordered, the opportunity to change pressure,
purge or reactor conversion may be lost, or a t least, tightly
constrained. The greatest flexibility in optimization is available during the early design period. Therefore, the preparation
of the process simulation model should be one of the first
objectives. Other advantages, of course, acrue from having the
model, such as development of control strategies, studying
synthesis alternatives, evaluating effluent problems, etc.
The accuracy of the simulation must be considered in deciding how far to carry the optimization procedure and in establishing the credibility of the results. In all of the iterative
computations, convergence errors are introduced. These errors
can be reduced by specifying tight tolerances, of course, at the
expense of computer time. The production rates shown in
Table I11 indicate the variability allowed in this study. Tolerances were specified to control the production rate within
1.5% (12 TPD). This same level of variability would be reflected in the ROI; therefore, convergence of the optimization
should not be attempted below the tolerance specified for the
material and energy balances (0.3% ROI in this study). Looser
tolerances might be used early in the search, with some saving
in computer time.
The results of the second optimization run of the 800 T P D
plant are shown as the last entry in Table 111. The objective
functions agree within the specified tolerance, as do the values
of the independent variables. The agreement of these two
cases confirm location of the optimum.
2. Optimization of 1000 TPD MeOH Plant. The search
history and sensitivity studies for a 1000 T P D plant are given
in Tables V, VI, and VI1 of the supplementary microfilm. The
history of this search shows that in the first hour, the ROI
improved from 7 to 18%. Another 1.5 h of searching resulted

in a maximum ROI of 22010. Again, the improvement in process

economics clearly appears t o justify the expenditure of engineering and computer time. As expected, the values of the
independent variables a t the optimum are the same as for the
800 T P D plant. T h e improvement in ROI from 20 to 22% is,
of course, due to the economies of scale of the larger plant.
3. Optimization of MeOH Plant with Fixed Feed Rate.
The results of optimization of a MeOH plant with a fixed feed
rate of 1350 mol of methane per hour are shown in Tables VIII,
IX and X of the supplementary material. This study was
performed without use of the production rate control module.
The optimal values of the variables were nearly identical with
those of the larger plants.
Variations in the production rate for the improved search
points were found to be a t most f6%,indicating t h a t a successful optimization might be performed without iterations
to control the production rate. However, the CPU time for this
run was about the same as for the other studies. T h e time for
each ROI computation is reduced, as expected, for the fixed
feed case (1 min compared to 1.6 min); but the search was
much slower in locating valid search points. This can be explained by the fact that the ROI is a much smoother function
lor a fixed plant size. Therefore, it becomes easier to locate
values of the variables that will improve the economics when
the plant size is fixed.
It may be concluded that while the computer time is reduced in evaluating the function with a fixed feed rate, the
time for optimization cannot be expected to improve. This is
probably true, regardless of the optimization algorithm employed, when ROI or earnings are chosen as the objective
function.

Conclusions
It may be concluded that a detailed flowsheet simulation
model of a complex chemical process can be used for optimization without use of unreasonable amounts of computer time.
The expenditure of engineering time to prepare the model and
computer time for optimization represents one of the best
investment opportunities available. T h e lack of experienced
personnel to do optimization studies may be a realistic barrier,
but one that can only be overcome by practice.

Nomenclature
DJ = exit temperature of J t h catalyst bed ( J = 1, 3, 5 , 7),
I3
D K = inlet temperature of the K t h catalyst bed ( K = 2 , 4 ,
61, O R
D8,D9, D10 = critical ratios of carbon deposition
Literature Cited
Ballman, S. H., M. S. Theis, University of Missouri, Rolla, Mo., 1976.
Barneson, R. A . , Brannock. J. C., Moore, J. G.. Morris, C., Chem. Eng., 77 (16),
132 (July 27,1970).
Bracken. J., McCormick, G. P., "Selected Applications of Non-linear Programming," Wiley, New York, N.Y., 1968.
Friedman, P., Pinder, K. L., Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., 11, 512

(1 972).
Gaines, L. D., Gaddy. J. L . , Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., 15, 1 (1976).
Gaines, L. D., Gaddy, J. L., "University of Missouri-Rolla PROPS User's Guide,"
University of Missouri-Rolla, Mo., 1974.
Hedley. B., Powers, W., Stobaugh, R. B., Hydrocarbon Process, 50 (9),
275

(1970).
Heuckroth, M. W., Gaines. L. D.. Gaddy, J. L., AIChE J., 22 (4),
744 (1976).
Hougen. 0. A.. Watson, K. M., Ragatz. R. R., "Chemical Process Principles,"
2nd ed, pp 986,and 1048.Wiley, New York. N.Y., 1966.
Kelahan. R. C., Gaddy, J. L., "Variable Elimination for Optimization with Difficult
Inequality Constraints," submitted to AlChEJ., 1977.
Komatsu, S., Ind. Eng. Chem., 60,2 (1968).
Mehta, D. D., Ross, D. E., Hydrocarbon Process., 49 (1l), 183 (1970).
Morse, P. L., Hydrocarbon Process., 52 (l),
113 (1973).
Motard, R. L., Shacham, M., Rosen, E. M.. AlChEJ., 21 (3).417 (1975).
Natta, G., "Synthesis of Methanol," "Catalysis," P. H. Emmett, Ed., Voi. 3,pp
394-411, Reinhold, New York. N.Y., 1955.
Seader, J. D., Dallin, D. E., Chem. Eng. Computing, Vol. 1. AlChE Workshop
Series (1972).
Shah, M. J., Stillman, R. E., Ind. Eng. Chem., Proc. Des. Dev., 62 (12),59

(1 970).
Shannon. P.T., Johnson, A . I., Crowe, C. M., Hoffman, T. W., Hamielec, A. E.,
Woods, D. R., Chem. Eng. Prog., 62 (6),
49 (1966).
5 5 (1970).
Strelzoff, S., Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp. Ser., 66 (98),
Umeda. T., Ichikawa, A.. Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., IO, 229
( 1971).

Wellman, D., Katell. S.. Hydrocarbon Process Pet. Refiner, 42 (6),135

( 1963).

Receit'ed f o r reciew J u n e 2 2 , 1976

Accepted M a r c h 25, 1977
Presented a t t h e 81st N a t i o n a l M e e t i n g of t h e A m e r i c a n I n s t i t u t e of
C h e m i c a l Engineers, Kansas C i t y . M o . , April 1976.
S u p p l e m e n t a r y M a t e r i a l A v a i l a b l e . M o d e l flowsheet s i m u l a t i o n

( l i pages, i n c l u d i n g 6 tables). O r d e r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n is g i v e n o n a n y
c u r r e n t m a s t h e a d page.

The Crystallization and Drying of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET)

Brian D. Whitehead
Zimmer Aktiengesellschaft, 6000 Frankfurt am Main 60, West Germany

Following a brief discussion of PET crystallization theory, the theory of PET drying is discussed in detail, together
with a review of the required data. The application to practical processes and associated problems is then reviewed, before summarizing future developments.

Introduction
This paper discusses the crystallization and drying stages
necessary before the final processing of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) to finished products. The underlying theory
of these two unit operations will be summarized, together with
a review of the necessary physical property data. Then the
problems encountered in drying processes will be discussed.

Finally, future developments in PET drying technology will

be outlined.

The

for Drying PET

T h e production and processing stages of PET are still
mostly carried out at separate locations or even by separate
companies. Even within one company, it is rare t o find that
Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Dev., Vol. 16,No. 3, 1977

341