5pecificotions

1be tbetmoJyoomlc moJel oseJ fot tbls system ls Nk1l

When comparlng Lhe llLeraLure vLL uaLa for MeLhanol (A)/WaLer (8) sysLem wlLh Lhe vLL uaLa
obLalned from n81L model Lhe n81L Lhermodynamlc model ls a good represenLaLlon of Lhe
llLeraLure daLa obLalned from vapor Llquld Lqulllbrlum uaLa 1he meLhod for chooslng n81L
lnsLead of oLher Lhermodynamlc models was based Lhe value obLalned for Lhe coefflclenL of
deLermlnaLlon (8
2
) 1he yvalues glven ln Lhe llLeraLure were compared wlLh Lhe yvalues glven
by Lhe n81L unllAC/unlCuAC and S8k Lhermodynamlc models llgure 2 represenLs a 1x?
ulagram of for each model


llgure 1 1x? ulagram for dlfferenL Lhermodynamlc models

1he followlng equaLlon was used Lo calculaLe Lhe coefflclenL of deLermlnaLlon

2
= -

LRR

101

LRR
= (

)
2

LRR
= (

)
2

=

n

Where
LRR
ls Lhe resldual sum squares
101
ls Lhe LoLal sum squares

ls Lhe publlshed
daLa

ls Lhe experlmenLal daLa ls Lhe mean of publlshed daLa and n ls Lhe number of
observaLlon
1he Lable below represenLs Lhe 8
2
value obLalned for each model

0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
M
e
t
h
a
n
o
|

V
a
p
o
r

M
o
|
e

e
r
c
e
n
t
Methano| L|qu|d Mo|e ercent
1k D|agram
vLL uaLa (LlLeraLure)
vLL uaLa (n81L)
vLL uaLa (unllAC/unlCuAC)
vLL uaLa (S8k)
1

Mode| Nk1L UNIUAC]UNIIAC Skk
k
2
9971 992 9968
1able 1 8
2
for each Lhermodynamlc model

8ased on Lhe resulLs obLalned from Lhe calculaLlons of 8
2
n81L presenLed Lhe value closesL Lo 1
Lherefore lL was chosen as Lhe Lhermodynamlc model

1he Lable below represenLs Lhe calculaLlons on deLermlnlng 8
2
for each model 1he pressure
used for Lhe calculaLlons ls 147 psla
SysLem MeLhanol(A)/WaLer(8) (LlLeraLure values)

L|qu|d (A) Vapor (A) 1emp (deg C) (y|yavg)2
0 0 934
238443
321 19 933
101363
372 222 94
82011
323 294 923
43937
393 308 913
40130
73 332 899
24433
876 39 881
14013
134 49 831
338
138 316 839
038
182 332 829
1903
223 393 821
7161
29 643 787
18124
349 703 767
37879
813 918 674
167793
918 963 636
206684
100 100 634
241693

sum(y|yavg)2 1248026

1able 2 CalculaLlons of 8
2

n81L 1PL8MCu?nAMlC MCuLL unllAC/unlCuAC 1PL8MCu?nAMlC MCuLL S8k 1PL8MCu?nAMlC MCuLL
Vapor (A) (y|f|)2 Vapor (A) (y|f|)2 Vapor (A) (y|f|)2
0 000 0 0 0 0
1772 164 136 1136 161 841
2034 276 1808 169744 197 623
2829 123 2498 193364 2713 30623
3041 013 271 1369 2924 24336
3498 003 31664 12303296 3274 60316
3869 010 3338 131044 374 236
3263 1318 4936 03136 3084 33836
3318 230 3014 21316 3137 00329
3643 131 3362 24964 3434 04336
614123 446 3904 00676 3947 00289
6713 812 6348 13924 6333 10609
7121 083 7013 00289 6962 04624
92 004 9279 09801 9233 02809
9641 001 9687 03249 9646 00236
100 000 100 0 100 0
Sum(ylfl)2 3637 Sum(ylfl)2 9310 Sum(ylfl)2 3960
82 09971 82 0992 82 09968
2



, fot lomps keflox utom ulstlllotloo olomo 1toys 5tololess 5teel
, fot ooJeoset ooJ kebollet 5tololess 5teel 1obeotboo 5teel 5bell
8ased on Lhe lnformaLlon obLalned ln Lhe arLlcle 1he LffecL of MeLhanol on Lhe Corroslon of
Carbon SLeel ln SweeL or Sour LnvlronmenL# meLhanol becomes corroslve Lo Carbon SLeel ln
Lhe presence of oxygen Also accordlng Lo Lhls source meLhanol can become corroslve Lo
carbon sLeel ln Lhe presence of waLer uue Lo Lhese reasons and based on Lable 79 page 203 ln
Lhe book Analysls SynLhesls and ueslgn of Chemlcal rocesses" where lL sLaLes LhaL Lhe
corroslon of SLalnless SLeel due Lo MeLhanol ls accepLable Lhe chosen MCC used ln Lhls sysLem
ls SLalnless SLeel for umps 8eflux urum ulsLlllaLlon Column and 1rays

lor Lhe Condenser and 8eboller Lhe MCC for Lhe shell slde ls Carbon SLeel because lL wlll noL ln
conLacL wlLh meLhanol lL wlll be ln conLacL wlLh coollng waLer and low pressure sLeam whlch
does noL have ma[or corroslon effecLs on Carbon SLeel 1he maln reason for chooslng Carbon
SLeel as Lhe MCC for Lhe shell slde ls because lL wlll be cheaper Lhan uslng SLalnless SLeel 1ube
SLalnless SLeel Shell

1toy fflcleocy olcolotloo
1he valve Lray efflclency ls calculaLed uslng Lhe C'Connell correlaLlon found ln Lhe book
SeparaLlon rocess rlnclples" page 291 Lq 743 whlch ls glven by

= . (o )
-.226
()
Where relaLlve volaLlllLy of Lhe mlxLure and vlscoslLy of Lhe mlxLure ln c
1he average relaLlve volaLlllLy can be calculaLed Lhrough Lhe followlng equaLlon
o =
o
t
o
btt

()
8ased on Lhe heurlsLlcs glven on Lable 1113 lLem #2 page 383 Lhe relaLlve volaLlllLy can be
deLermlned Lhrough
o
12
=

1
-

2
-
()
Where
1
-
= opor prssr o coponn , on
2
-
= opor prssr o coponn
ln Lhls sysLem componenL 1 ls meLhanol and componenL 2 ls waLer
1he vapor pressure can be calculaLed uslng Lhe AnLolne's LquaLlon whlch ls glven by
n
sut
(o) = -

()
()
3






1able 3 AnLolne's ConsLanLs for MeLhanol and WaLer
1he AnLolne's LquaLlon and ConsLanLs for MeLhanol and WaLer were found on page 682 1able
82 ln Lhe book lnLroducLlon Lo Chemlcal Lnglneerlng 1hermodynamlcs"
lrom ChemCad Lhe LemperaLure aL Lhe Lop of Lhe dlsLlllaLlon column ls 14809
o
l whlch ls equal
Lo 643
o
C 1he LemperaLure aL Lhe boLLoms ls 21201
o
l or 10001
o
C 1herefore Lhe vapor
pressure for each componenL aL Lhe Lop and boLLom ls calculaLed uslng Lhe AnLolne's LquaLlon

vap1Lop
10431ka
vap2Lop
24369 ka

vap1boLLom
33132
vap2boLLom
101369 ka
1he relaLlve volaLlllLles for Lhe Lop and boLLom can now be calculaLed

1C

vap1Lop
/
vap2Lop
423

8C11CM

vap1boLLom
/
vap2boLLom
346
1herefore Lhe average volaLlllLy ls
(423+346)/2 386
1he vlscoslLy of Lhe sysLem can be calculaLed Lhrough Lhe followlng equaLlon whlch was found
ln Lhe arLlcle vlscoslLy and denslLy of blnary mlxLures of alcohols and polyols wlLh Lhree carbon
aLoms and waLer equaLlon for Lhe correlaLlon of vlscoslLles of blnary mlxLure"
=
1

1

2

2
()
Where vlscoslLy of Lhe mlxLure 1meLhanol 2waLer x llquld mole fracLlon
1he vlscoslLy ls calculaLed from Lhe feed lrom ChemCad we know LhaL Lhe mlxLure ls 30 mole
of meLhanol (x
1
) and 30 mole of waLer (x
2
) We also know LhaL Lhe LemperaLure of Lhe feed ls
16233
o
l AL Lhls LemperaLure Lhe vlscoslLy of each componenL can be deLermlned

2
= .9 c
(Source hLLp//wwwenglneerlngLoolboxcom/absoluLedynamlcvlscoslLywaLerd_373hLml)

1
= . c

Methano| Water
A 163783 163872
8 363827 38837
C 2393 23017
4

(Source hLLp//wwwefundacom/maLerlals/common_maLl/show_llquldcfm?MaLlnameMeLhanol)
1herefore uslng equaLlon 3 Lhe vlscoslLy of Lhe mlxLure ls
334 c
1he Lray efflclency can now be calculaLed slnce Lhe values of Lhe relaLlve volaLlllLy and vlscoslLy
of Lhe mlxLure are known uslng equaLlon 1 we obLaln

= . (o )
-.226

= .9%
ptimitotion Process
ln order Lo achleve 999 purlLy of meLhanol ln Lhe dlsLlllaLe wlLh Lhe leasL amounL of negaLlve neL
resenL value (nv) Lhe followlng varlables were manlpulaLed
1 number of SLages
2 leed 1ray
3 Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol ln 8oLLoms
1he followlng graphs represenL nv vs Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol ln 8oLLoms Lach graph ls for a
dlfferenL number of sLages 1he curves were ploLLed accordlngly Lo Lhe feed Lray locaLlon
30 S1ACLS
llgure 2 nv vs 8oLLom Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol for 30 SLages
34
333
33
323
32
313
31
303
30
293
29
0 001 002 003 004 003 006
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
30 SLages leed 48
30 SLages leed 47
30 SLages leed 46
30 SLages 1ray 43
30 SLages leed 44
3

43 S1ACLS
llgure 3 nv vs 8oLLom Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol for 43 SLages

40 S1ACLS
llgure 4 nv vs 8oLLom Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol for 40 SLages




31
308
306
304
302
30
298
296
294
292
29
0 0003 001 0013 002 0023
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
43 SLages leed 42
43 SLages leed 41
43 SLages leed 40
43 SLages leed 39
43 SLages leed 38
34
333
33
323
32
313
31
303
30
293
29
0 001 002 003 004 003 006
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
40 SLages leed 38
40 SLages leed 37
40 SLages leed 36
40 SLages leed 33
40 SLages leed 34
6

33 S1ACLS
llgure 3 nv vs 8oLLom Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol for 33 SLages

30 S1ACLS
llgure 6 nv vs 8oLLom Mole lracLlon of MeLhanol for 30 SLages


43
41
39
37
33
33
31
29
0 001 002 003 004 003 006
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
33 SLages leed 34
33 SLages leed 33
33 SLages leed 32
33 SLages leed 31
33 SLages leed 30
33 SLages leed 29
38
37
36
33
34
33
32
31
30
0 002 004 006 008 01 012
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
30 SLages leed 29
30 SLages leed 28
30 SLages leed 27
30 SLages leed 26
30 SLages leed 23
7

8y comblnlng Lhe curves from Lhe dlfferenL amounL of sLages whlch ylelded Lhe leasL amounL of
nv lL ls posslble Lo deLermlne Lhe range of amounL of sLages whlch wlll yleld Lhe leasL amounL of
nv
llgure 7 nv comparlson wlLh SLages and leed 1ray
lrom Lhe graph above lL can be observed LhaL Lhe opLlmum number of sLages has Lo be beLween 40
and 30 lL ls also noLlceable from Lhe graph above LhaL Lhe leasL amounL of nv occurred when Lhe
boLLom mole fracLlon of meLhanol ls 002 and Lhe feed Lray ls elLher flve or slx sLages Lrays above
Lhe LoLal number of sLages

llgure 8 SLages yleldlng nv
31
308
306
304
302
30
298
296
294
292
0 0002 0004 0006 0008 001
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
NV (5 M||||on) vs 8ottom Mo|e Iract|on of Methano|
30 SLages leed 43
43 SLages leed 39
40 SLages leed 33
33 SLages leed 30
30 SLages leed 26
2934
2933
2932
2931
293
2949
2948
2947
2946
2943
2944
2943
40 42 44 46 48 30
N

V

(
5

M
|
|
|
|
o
n
)
Stages
NV (5 M||||on) vs Stages
nv vs SLages
8