Modeling Simulation and Control of Dimet
Modeling Simulation and Control of Dimet
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Dimethyl ether (DME) as a clean fuel has attracted the interest of many researchers from both industrial
Received 26 December 2009 communities and academia. The commercially proven process for large scale production of dimethyl
Received in revised form 2 September 2010 ether consists of catalytic dehydration of methanol in an adiabatic fixed-bed reactor. In this study, the
Accepted 29 November 2010
industrial reactor of DME synthesis with the accompanying feed preheater has been simulated and con-
Available online xxx
trolled in dynamic conditions. The proposed model, consisting of a set of algebraic and partial differential
equations, is based on a heterogeneous one-dimensional unsteady state formulation. To verify the pro-
Keywords:
posed model, the simulation results have been compared to available data from an industrial reactor
Fixed-bed reactor
Heterogeneous model
at steady state conditions. A good agreement has been found between the simulation and plant data. A
DME reactor control sensitivity analysis has been carried out to evaluate the influence of different possible disturbances on
the process. Also, the controllability of the process has been investigated through dynamic simulation
of the process under a conventional feedback PID controller. The responses of the system to disturbance
and setpoint changes have shown that the control structure can maintain the process at the desired
conditions with an appropriate dynamic behavior.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction abatic packed bed reactors [6]. Due to simplicity and lower costs,
adiabatic fixed bed reactors can be the first choice for catalytic pro-
Dimethyl ether as a basic chemical product is mainly consumed cesses having low or intermediate heat of reactions [7]. However, in
in industries as a solvent and propellant in various aerosol products case of highly endothermic or exothermic reactions, the problems
[1]. The similarity of some physical properties of DME, liquefied of reaction extinguishing or catalyst sintering may happen [8]. The
petroleum gases and diesel fuel has presented DME as a clean fuel fluidized bed reactors have been suggested by some researchers
that can be used in diesel engines, power generation, and other as a perfect reactor for DME synthesis [9,10]. Fluidized bed reac-
purposes such as a substitute for LNG [2]. It can be produced from tors showed the better heat removal characteristics due to freely
a variety of feed-stock such as natural gas, crude oil, residual oil, moving catalyst particles in the bed. However, collision between
coal, waste products and bio-mass [3]. Although the commercially catalyst particles and the reactor wall causes loss of catalyst.
proven technology for DME production is through dehydration of Simulation of packed bed reactors is not an easy task, since sys-
pure methanol in an adiabatic fixed-bed reactor, many researchers tems of nonlinear partial differential equations have to be solved
are working on the direct conversion of syngas to DME over a dual along with nonlinear algebraic relationships [11]. Modeling and
heterogeneous catalyst [4]. simulation of fixed-bed reactors have been done for many indus-
DME can be produced in packed bed or slurry reactors. Although trial and pilot scales reactors. For instance, Shahrokhi et al. modeled
slurry reactors have the advantage of better heat removal capa- and simulated the dynamic behavior of a fixed bed reactor for
bility by coil or jacket and good productivity and good interface methanol production from syngas and proposed an optimizer to
contacting due to small solids particle size, they suffer from signif- maximization of the production rate [12]. Jahanmiri and Eslam-
icant mass transfer resistance due to the use of inert liquid phases loueyan modeled and simulated the isothermal fixed-bed reactor
such as waxy liquid [5]. At present, DME is commercially produced for methanol production in industrial scale [13]. They calculated the
through methanol dehydration using acidic porous catalysts in adi- optimal temperature profile of the shell side to maximize methanol
production.
Fixed-bed DME synthesis reactors have been investigated
through a number of research studies. Lee et al. modeled and ana-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 711 2303071; fax: +98 711 6287294.
lyzed DME production from syngas in a fixed-bed reactor at steady
E-mail addresses: eslamlo@shirazu.ac.ir, reslamlou@gmail.com
(R. Eslamloueyan). state condition [14]. Nasehi et al. simulated an industrial adiabatic
0255-2701/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
Table 1 Table 2
The reaction kinetics and equilibrium constants. Equipment and catalyst parameters.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
Table 3 dTcold dT Do
Feed specification of the industrial DME reactor. = −ug cold + U(Thot − Tcold ) (11)
dt dz · Acold · Cp
Parameter Value
The overall heat transfer coefficient in the heat exchanger is
◦
T ( C) 260 calculated from
P (bar) 18.2
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 50.81 1 1 A ln(Do /Di ) A 1
= + i + i (12)
Mass fraction (%) U hi 2LKw Ao ho
Methanol 94%
Water 1% In Eq. (12), the heat transfer coefficient in the shell side (ho ) and
DME 5% the tube side (hi ) are calculated using the following equations [24]:
ho Do Cp
1/3
= 0.33(Re)0.6 (13)
kf k
resistances inside and at the surface of a body. For the Biot numbers
hi Di Cp
1/3 0.14
smaller than 0.1, the heat conduction inside the body is much faster = 0.023(Re)0.8 (14)
than the heat convection away from the surface, and the tempera- k k w
ture gradient is negligible inside of the body. To justify the first two
3.3. Auxiliary equation
assumptions, it should be notified the industrial reactor considered
in this study have insulation that causes the heat loss from the reac-
Auxiliary equations are used for prediction of the model param-
tor wall to the environment negligible in comparison to the heat
eters. In these equations i is the effectiveness factor which is
release in the reactor, and also because of high Reynold’s number
defined as actual reaction rate per particle to theoretical reaction
(about 10,000), the assumption of plug flow is reasonable. Further-
rate based on the external pellet surface concentration, which is
more, Nasehi et al. simulated the reactor at steady state condition
obtained from dusty gas model calculations [25]. It can be calcu-
by using a two-dimensional heterogeneous model with considera-
lated from the following equation:
tion of the heat loss from the insulation to environment [22]. The
results of this simulation showed that the temperature difference ri dVp
between the reactor center and the reactor wall is at most 4 ◦ C. So, i = (15)
Vp . ri
the heat loss has a negligible influence on the simulation results in surface
one-dimensional plug flow model. In the heterogeneous model the physical properties of chemi-
The mass and energy balances for the gas and solid phase are cal species and overall mass and heat transfer coefficients between
expressed by the following equations: catalyst solid phase and gas phase must be estimated. The over-
Gas phase: all mass transfer coefficient between solid and gas phase has been
obtained from the correlation proposed by Cussler [26].
∂Ci ∂C
ε = −us i − kgi av (Ci − Cis
s
) (5)
∂t ∂z kgi = 103 (1.17Re−0.42 Sci −0.67 ug ) (16)
∂T ∂T In Eq. (16), the Sc is calculated for components along the reac-
g cpg ε = −us g cp + hf av (Tss − T ) (6)
∂t ∂z tor. Mass transfer diffusion coefficient for each component in the
Solid phase: mixture has been estimated by:
1 − yi
(1 − ε)
∂Cis s
= −kgi av (Ci − Cis ) + i Bs ri (7) Dim = (17)
∂t (yi /Dij )
Cp = yi Cp(i) (21)
3.2. Heat exchanger model
Table 4 presents the values of a, b, c and d in Eq. (20).
There are no phase changes in the heat exchanger and this
unit is small in compare with the reactor unit. The shell and tube 4. Numerical solution
heat exchanger used for preheating feed stream is modeled at the
dynamic condition by the following equations: To solve the set of nonlinear partial differential equations (PDE)
obtained from dynamic modeling, the reactor length is divided into
dThot dT Di equal discrete intervals, and by using finite difference method the
= −ug hot − U(Thot − Tcold ) (10)
dt dz · Ahot · Cp PDEs are converted into a set of ordinary differential equations
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
Table 4 Table 5
Parameters of heat capacity coloration. Comparison of the steady state simulation results of the reactor with plant data.
(ODE) in time domain. The set of equations are solved by 4th order
Runge–Kutta [28]. 6000
Before carrying out dynamic simulation, the stationary con-
dition of the system should be obtained through solving the DME
governing steady-state equations. The aim of performing steady 5000 MEOH
state simulation of the DME reactor is to determine the con- Water
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
0.5 Table 6
Calculated average mass transfer and effective diffusion coefficients in the reactor.
0.0036
0.32 kwater (m2 s−1 ) 0.005
0.23
680
0.14
Gas Phase
Temperature (K)
Solid Phase 640
0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 600
Length (m)
520
Also, the predicted temperature profile along the reactor 8
obtained from the simulation is shown in Fig. 5. The temperature 6 50
40
approaches to equilibrium temperature due to heat generation by 4 30
reaction, and remains constant. 2 20
Length (m) 10
The calculated average heat transfer coefficient between gas and 0
Time (sec)
0
catalyst phase (hf ) in Eq. (19) is about 1170 W m−2 K−1 . Also, the
average estimated viscosity and molar heat capacity of the reac- Fig. 6. Dynamic temperature profile along the reactor for 10 ◦ C step change in the
tion mixture are about 1.6 × 10−7 kg m−1 s−1 and 69.5 W mol−1 K−1 , inlet stream to the reactor.
660
625 0.5
DME mole fraction
0.4
Temperature (K)
0.3
590
0.2
0.1
555
0
8
6 50
40
4 30
520 2 20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Length (m) 10
0 0 Time (sec)
Length (m)
Fig. 7. Dynamic DME mole fraction profile along the reactor for 10 ◦ C step change
Fig. 5. Predicted temperature profile along the reactor. in the inlet stream to the reactor.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
661
0.5
659
DME molefraction
0.4
Temperature(K)
0.3
657
0.2
655 0.1
0
8
653 6 50
40
4 30
2 20
Length (m) 10
0 0 Time (sec)
651
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (sec) Fig. 10. Dynamic DME mole fraction profile for 0.05 step change in the methanol
and water vapor mole fractions of the inlet stream.
Fig. 8. The outlet temperature profile from the reactor to 10 ◦ C step change in the
inlet temperature.
652.5
The feed composition effect was studied by applying 0.05 step
changes in the mole fractions of both methanol and water vapor.
Figs. 9 and 10 represent dynamic responses of the reactor tempera-
651.5
ture and DME mole fraction profiles along the reactor, respectively.
The response of the reactor outlet temperature to the step
Temperature(K)
652.4
680
Temperature(K)
Temperature(K)
640 652.35
600
652.3
560
520 652.25
8
6 50
40
4 30 652.2
2 20 0 10 20 30 40 50
Length (m) 10 Time (sec)
0 0 Time (sec)
Fig. 9. Dynamic temperature profile for 0.05 step change in the methanol and water Fig. 12. The outlet temperature profile for 2 step change in the feed pressure.
vapor mole fractions of the inlet stream.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
850 657
656
810
655
Temperature(K)
Temperature(K)
770
654
730
653
690
652
650 651
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (min) Time (min)
Fig. 13. The outlet temperature profile for 10 ◦ C step change in the fresh feed tem- Fig. 15. Outlet temperature response for rejection of the disturbance by the closed
perature to preheater. loop control system.
0.442 0.439
0.4388
0.432
DME molefraction
0.4386
DME molefraction
0.422 0.4384
0.4382
0.412
0.438
0.402 0.4378
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (sec) Time (min)
Fig. 14. The outlet DME concentration for 10 ◦ C step change in the fresh feed tem- Fig. 16. Outlet DME concentration response for rejection of the disturbance by the
perature to preheater. closed loop control system.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
300 668
250
664
Set point
Mole flow (mol sec-1)
Temperature(K)
200
150 660
100
656
50
0 652
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 10 20 30 40
Time (min) Time (min)
Fig. 17. Manipulated variable variations in case of load rejection. Fig. 18. The variation of the outlet temperature for set point tracking.
can be seen from these figures, the load is completely rejected after
about 7 min using a PID controller. The variation of the manipu-
lated variable, i.e. bypass flow rate, has been represented in Fig. 17. 0.4373
The manipulated variable response has no sever oscillation and is
similar to the behavior of an appropriate control system.
The dynamic characteristics of the control loop response for
disturbance rejection are presented in Table 7. 0.4364
Table 7
Characteristics of the control loop response for disturbance rejection.
160
Time (min)
Rise time 4
Peak time 9.7
80
Settling time 17.3
Table 8 0
Dynamic properties of the closed loop response for setpoint tracking. 0 10 20 30 40
Time (min)
Overshoot 42%
Rise time (min) 3.8
Settling time (min) 19.8 Fig. 20. Variation of the bypass stream flow rate for set point tracking.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
Appendix A. Nomenclature
664
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013
ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
CEP-5933; No. of Pages 10
[4] L. Makarand, R. Gogate, C.J. Kulika, A novel single-step dimethyl ether (DME) to dimethyl ether, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering 17 (4) (2009)
synthesis in a three-phase slurry reactor from co-rich syngas Sunggyu, Chem- 630–634.
ical Engineering Science 47 (13–14) (1992) 3769–3776. [18] E.M. Assaf, R.C. Giordano, C.A.O. Nascimento, Thermal runaway of ethylene
[5] J.W. Guo, Y.Q. Niu, B.J. Zhang, Macro kinetics study on DME synthesis from oxidation reactors: prevision through neural network, Chemical Engineering
syngas in slurry reactor, Natural Gas Chemical Industry 25 (2000) 4–7. Science 51 (11) (1996) 3107–3112.
[6] W.Z. Lu, L.H. Teng, W.D. Xiao, Simulation and experiment study of Dimethly [19] S.B. Jorgensen, Fixed bed reactor dynamics and control: a review, in: Proceed-
ether synthesis from syngas in a fluidized-bed reactor, Chemical Engineering ings of the IFAC Control of a Distillation Columns and Chemical Reactors, Oxford,
Science 59 (2004) 5455–5464. 1986, pp. 11–24.
[7] G.F. Froment, K.B. Bischoff, Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design, 2nd edn., [20] R. Aguilara, A. Poznyakb, R. Martınez-Guerrab, R. Maya-Yescasc, Temperature
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990. control in catalytic cracking reactors via a robust PID controller, Journal of
[8] H.S. Fogler, Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, 2nd edn., Prentice-Hall, Process Control 12 (6) (2002) 695–705.
1992. [21] G. Berćić, J. Levec, Intrinsic and global reaction rate of methanol dehydration
[9] Y.C. Ray, T.S. Jiang, C.Y. Wen, Particle attrition phenomena in a fluidized bed, over Al2 O3 pellets, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 31 (1992)
Powder Technology 49 (3) (1987) 193–206. 1035–1040.
[10] Y. Petukhov, H. Kalman, A new apparatus for particle impact tests, Particle and [22] M. Nasehi, R. Eslamloueyan, A. Jahanmiri, Simulation of DME synthesis reac-
Particle Systems Characterization 20 (4) (2003) 267–275. tor from methanol, in: 11th National Iranian Chemical Engineering Congress,
[11] D.R. Parisi, M.A. Laborde, Modeling steady-state heterogeneous gas–solid reac- Tehran, Iran, 2006.
tor using feed forward neural networks, Computer and Chemical Engineering [23] J.F. Richardson, J.H. Harker, J.R. Backhurst, Chemical Engineering, vol. 2, 5th
25 (9–10) (2001) 1241–1250. edn., Butterworth–Heinemann, 1999.
[12] M. Shahrokhi, G.R. Baghmisheh, Modeling, simulation and control of a methanol [24] A.P. Colburn, A method of correlating forced convection heat transfer data and
synthesis fixed-bed reactor, Computer and Chemical Engineering 60 (15) a comparison with fluid friction, Transaction on AIChE 29 (1933) 174–210.
(2005) 4275–4286. [25] G.H. Graaf, H. Choltens, E.J. Tamhuis, A.A.C.M. Beenackers, Intra-particle dif-
[13] A. Jahanmiri, R. Eslamlueyan, Optimal temperature profile in methanol synthe- fusion limitations in low-pressure methanol synthesis, Chemical Engineering
sis reactor, Chemical Engineering Communications 189 (6) (2002) 713–741. Science 45 (4) (1990) 773–783.
[14] S.B. Lee, W. Cho, D.K. Park, E.S. Yoon, Simulation of fixed bed reactor for dimethyl [26] E.L. Cussler, Diffusion Mass Transfer in Fluid Systems, Cambridge University
ether synthesis, Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering 23 (4) (2006) 522–530. Press, United Kingdom, 1984.
[15] S.M. Nasehi, R. Eslamlueyan, A. Jahanmiri, Simulation of DME reactor from [27] J.M. Smith, Chemical Engineering Kinetics, McGraw Hill, New York, 1980.
methanol, in: Proceedings of the 11th Chemical Engineering Conference, 2006. [28] J.R. Dormand, P.J. Prince, A family of embedded Runge–Kutta formulae, Journal
[16] K. Omata, T. Ozaki, T. Umegaki, Y. Watanabe, N. Nukui, M. Yamada, Optimization of Computational and Applied Mathematics 6 (1980) 19–26.
of the temperature profile of a temperature gradient reactor for DME synthesis [29] J.B. Ziegler, N.B. Nichols, Optimum settings for automatic controllers, ASME
using a simple genetic algorithm assisted by a neural network: high-quality Transactions 64 (1942) 759–768.
transportation fuels, Energy & Fuels 17 (4) (2003) 836–841. [30] W.L. Luyben, Design of proportional integral and derivative controllers for inte-
[17] M. Fazlollahnejad, M. Taghizadeh, A. Eliassi, G. Bakeri, Experimental study grating dead-time processes, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 35
and modeling of an adiabatic fixed-bed reactor for methanol dehydration (1996) 3480.
Please cite this article in press as: M. Farsi, et al., Modeling, simulation and control of dimethyl ether synthesis in an industrial fixed-bed reactor,
Chem. Eng. Process. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.cep.2010.11.013